Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made an estimate of reoffending rates for prisoners released under the early release scheme.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We have had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe.
Whilst this change provided the intended medium-term relief, it was only ever a temporary change to bridge to a more sustainable solution. The Sentencing Bill has now been introduced to ensure we never run out of prison space again.
Our initial operational insights suggested there was not a significant change to the use and application of recall since the implementation of SDS40. We will, however, continue to monitor this.
The requested information cannot be provided because it would form a subset of the data that underpins future versions of these Official Statistics.
Proven reoffending rates are published regularly on an annual and quarterly basis. The most recent rates are available at the following link: www.gov.uk/government/collections/proven-reoffending-statistics.
Asked by: Lord Garnier (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many barristers and solicitors (1) are available to sit as Crown court recorders in England and Wales, and (2) sat as Crown court recorders in each week of the last 12 months for which figures are available
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below sets out the data held per month for the number of Recorders who hold a live Crime ticket (weekly data is not available) over the 12 months to June 2025, which is the latest month for which the data is available. It also sets out the number of Recorders who sat for at least 1 day in the Crown Court during that same month.
It should be noted that many Recorders will hold multiple tickets, so the Recorders listed here who have not sat in the Crown Court may have been sitting in Family or Civil instead. In addition, Recorders may have other professional obligations which mean that they are not available to sit in a particular month.
The Deputy Prime Minister recently announced an additional 1,250 sitting days in the Crown Court this year, which means the Crown Court will be able to sit for 111,250 days this year, 5,000 more than the days initially allocated last year. This enables the Crown Court to sit more days this year than ever before.
YEAR/MONTH | RECORDERS WITH CRIME AUTHORISATIONS | DAYS RECORDERS SAT IN CROWN |
2024/07 | 889 | 299 |
2024/08 | 886 | 299 |
2024/09 | 884 | 301 |
2024/10 | 881 | 257 |
2024/11 | 878 | 251 |
2024/12 | 874 | 182 |
2025/01 | 874 | 183 |
2025/02 | 872 | 167 |
2025/03 | 871 | 167 |
2025/04 | 867 | 228 |
2025/05 | 864 | 216 |
2025/06 | 862 | 241 |
Asked by: Mike Wood (Conservative - Kingswinford and South Staffordshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill on (a) the (i) processing and (ii) public interest considerations of Freedom of Information Act requests and (b) how Ministers reply to written Parliamentary Questions.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The provisions in the Public Office (Accountability) Bill are not intended to have any impact on the processing or public interest considerations of Freedom of Information Act requests. The Bill does not alter the existing law or guidance about how public authorities are required to respond to freedom of information requests or the expectations on ministers in replying to written Parliamentary Questions.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many appeals heard at the First-Tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum) were on the grounds that removal of the appellant from the UK would breach the UK’s obligations under the Refugee Convention in each of the last 12 months for which figures are available; and how many of those appeals were successful in each of those months.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The number of asylum, protection and revocation of protection appeals (those lodged on grounds relating to breach of the UK’s Refugee Convention obligations) determined by the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal and the number of those that were successful and allowed by the Tribunal can be found in the following table:
Table 1. First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) - Number of appeals determined at hearing or on paper for Asylum/Protection/Revocation of Protection(1), April 2024 to March 2025(2)
Year | Month | Determined at hearings / papers | Allowed/Granted |
2024 | April | 691 | 318 |
2024 | May | 832 | 360 |
2024 | June | 787 | 378 |
2024 | July | 1,006 | 488 |
2024 | August | 863 | 422 |
2024 | September | 994 | 447 |
2024 | October | 1,174 | 578 |
2024 | November | 1,198 | 534 |
2024 | December | 992 | 438 |
2025 | January | 1,085 | 479 |
2025 | February | 1,216 | 513 |
2025 | March | 1,301 | 553 |
The table shows the latest 12 months of available data. Published statistics can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunals-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2025.
Asked by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many appeals heard at the First-Tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum) were on the grounds that removal of the appellant from the UK was unlawful under the Human Rights Act 1998 in each of the last 12 months for which figures are available; and how many of those appeals were successful in each of those months.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The number of human rights appeals (those lodged on human rights grounds) determined by the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal and the number of those that were successful and allowed by the Tribunal can be found in the following table:
Table 1. First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) - Number of appeals determined at hearing or on paper for Human Rights Appeals, April 2024 to March 2025(1)
Year | Month | Determined at hearings / papers | Allowed/Granted |
2024 | April | 798 | 402 |
2024 | May | 778 | 414 |
2024 | June | 722 | 352 |
2024 | July | 727 | 383 |
2024 | August | 596 | 306 |
2024 | September | 617 | 298 |
2024 | October | 710 | 375 |
2024 | November | 522 | 240 |
2024 | December | 477 | 234 |
2025 | January | 491 | 249 |
2025 | February | 550 | 278 |
2025 | March | 592 | 259 |
The table shows the latest 12 months of available data. Published statistics can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunals-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2025.
Asked by: Lord Garnier (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many barristers and solicitors (1) are available to sit as deputy district judges (magistrates’ courts) in England and Wales, and (2) sat as deputy district judges (magistrates’ courts) in each week of the last 12 months for which figures are available.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
As at 1 April 2025 (the most recent month for which there are published statistics), there were 88 Deputy District Judges (Magistrates Court) where this was their primary appointment. Whilst we do collect data on Deputy District Judge sittings in the Magistrates’ Court, the data held centrally does not allow us robustly to identify how many of the 88 primary appointment Deputy District Judges sat each week or month.
Decisions as to when to list cases before Deputy District Judges rather than a panel of lay magistrates are made by the judiciary.
Asked by: Lord Garnier (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government which Crown courts in England and Wales have court rooms that are (1) usable but unused, and (2) unusable because of their state of repair or a lack of judges or court staff, in each week of the last 12 months for which figures are available.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The Crown Court operates from 84 buildings across England and Wales, with a core estate of over 500 courtrooms. Most are jury-enabled and suitable for trials, with the remainder supporting other judicial work, such as interlocutory hearings. The wider HMCTS estate—including magistrates’, civil, family, and tribunal rooms —can also be used for Crown Court business when required. As a result, the precise number of rooms available for Crown Court use at any given time is variable.
HMCTS’s priority is to ensure all funded sitting days are fully utilised each financial year through active courtroom management. Estate capacity is not a limiting factor: last year, we sat 107,771, representing over 99% of our allocation, and we remain on track to deliver all allocated days this year.
Temporary unavailability may arise due to maintenance, but also due to overspill from other trials, alternative judicial activities (such as, box work, civil, family and tribunals hearings, or coroner’s court work), or other legitimate uses (including meetings and video-link sessions). However, these factors do not prevent the Crown Courts from sitting at their funded allocation.
Asked by: Lord Garnier (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many court rooms in the Crown courts in England and Wales have not been used in each week of the last 12 months for which figures are available.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The Crown Court operates from 84 buildings across England and Wales, with a core estate of over 500 courtrooms. Most are jury-enabled and suitable for trials, with the remainder supporting other judicial work, such as interlocutory hearings. The wider HMCTS estate—including magistrates’, civil, family, and tribunal rooms —can also be used for Crown Court business when required. As a result, the precise number of rooms available for Crown Court use at any given time is variable.
HMCTS’s priority is to ensure all funded sitting days are fully utilised each financial year through active courtroom management. Estate capacity is not a limiting factor: last year, we sat 107,771, representing over 99% of our allocation, and we remain on track to deliver all allocated days this year.
Temporary unavailability may arise due to maintenance, but also due to overspill from other trials, alternative judicial activities (such as, box work, civil, family and tribunals hearings, or coroner’s court work), or other legitimate uses (including meetings and video-link sessions). However, these factors do not prevent the Crown Courts from sitting at their funded allocation.
Asked by: Mike Martin (Liberal Democrat - Tunbridge Wells)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will hold discussions with the Judicial College on the adequacy of the mandatory training for judges on (a) domestic abuse and (b) coercive control.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
To preserve judicial independence, statutory responsibility for judicial training is held by the Lady Chief Justice, Senior President of Tribunals and Chief Coroner. These responsibilities are fulfilled by the Judicial College. Whilst the content of judicial training is for the judiciary to decide, Ministers have relayed the Government’s view of the importance of domestic abuse training for judges and magistrates.
All judges and magistrates complete induction and regular continuation training. Training is designed to equip the judiciary with the essential knowledge and skills they need to discharge their duties effectively.
Family judges completed specialist mandatory training on domestic abuse between 2022 and 2024, which was also made available to civil judges. Training for judges who hear criminal cases includes judgecraft, effective decision-making and sentencing, and advancing procedural fairness. Dealing with the vulnerable in court and issues relating to domestic abuse are interwoven into much of the training. Magistrates sitting in the family and criminal jurisdictions receive mandatory domestic abuse training. The training is trauma-informed and reflects the wide nature of domestic abuse including coercive and controlling behaviour. Training seminars are complemented by a range of other resources, including the Equal Treatment Bench Book which includes specific guidance in relation to domestic abuse.
The College regularly reviews its training to ensure it remains high quality and up to date, and reflects contemporary law, practice and procedure.
Asked by: Suella Braverman (Conservative - Fareham and Waterlooville)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of the adequacy of the (a) judicial process and (b) sentencing in the case of Sir David Amess's murder.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Sentencing is a matter for the independent judiciary. In the case of Sir David Amess’s tragic murder, the judge imposed a life sentence with a whole life order. A whole life order is the most severe form of punishment the courts can impose. Such sentences have no minimum term and no possibility of Parole Board release, and as such they are reserved for the most heinous cases of murder. Our thoughts and sympathies remain with Sir David’s family.