Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

44812

registered interest
date	24/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 29 January 2013, Official Report, column 772W, on Judicial Review, what further assessment has been made of the reasons for the increase in the number of applications for judicial review.
tabling member constituency	Brent Central
tabling member printed	Sarah Teather
uin	193293
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/04/2014 answer text <p>The use of judicial review more than tripled between 2000 and 2013, from around 4,300 applications to around 15,700. The increase has been driven mainly by immigration and asylum cases but civil judicial reviews have increased by around 27% over the same period, from 1,745 in 2000 to 2,210 in 2013.</p><p> </p><p>In 2012 only around 1,400 of 7,600 applications considered for permission, including at an oral renewal, were granted permission to proceed to a final hearing. Between 1 October 2012 and 31 December 2013 around 30% of judicial reviews which reached the permission stage or oral renewal were found to be totally without merit.</p><p> </p><p>The governemnt is determined to improve the judicial review process. The rationale for the Government's reforms is set out in ‘Judicial review: further proposals for reform – the Government response' (<a href="https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review" target="_blank">https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/judicial-review</a>). The Government is determined to improve the judicial review process so that it is not open to abuse and arguable cases can proceed quickly to final resolution.</p><p> </p><p>The Government is clear that judicial review is, and will remain, an important means to ensure the actions of Government and other bodies are lawful.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 02/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1170 label Biography information for Sarah Teather

44813

registered interest
date	24/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reasons Worksop Courthouse is planned to close.
tabling member constituency	Bassetlaw
tabling member printed	John Mann
uin	193281
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>There are no plans to close the courthouse at Worksop. A consultation is currently underway on potential changes to listing arrangements at Worksop Magistrates' Court. The consultation commenced on 19 March 2014 and closes on 30 April 2014 and all responses will be taken into account before any decision is made.</p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	1387 label Biography information for Lord Mann

44816

registered interest
date	24/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will seek an estimate from the (a) Bailiwick of Jersey and (b) Bailiwick of Guernsey of the value of Russian (a) financial and (b) non-financial assets held in each such territory.
tabling member constituency	Mid Sussex
tabling member printed	Nicholas Soames
uin	193345
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Dependencies are not part of the UK but are self-governing dependencies of the Crown. This means they have their own directly elected legislative assemblies, administrative, fiscal and legal systems and their own courts of law. It is therefore not for the UK to extend the application of the Sanctions set out in the Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014. Equivalent measures have been implemented by the Crown Dependencies, who have kept Her Majesty's Government updated about their activities in this area.</p><p> </p><p>Her Majesty's Government does not routinely request information on the value of particular assets held in the Crown Dependencies.</p><p> </p><p>The UK and the Crown Dependencies recognise the importance of working together to promote the application of high international standards and implementing sanctions and asset freezing measures.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 193346 question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	116 label Biography information for Lord Soames of Fletching

44817

registered interest
date	24/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he take steps to extend the requirement to apply sanctions set out in Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014 to the (a) Bailiwick of Jersey and (b) Bailiwick of Guernsey.
tabling member constituency	Mid Sussex
tabling member printed	Nicholas Soames
uin	193346
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Dependencies are not part of the UK but are self-governing dependencies of the Crown. This means they have their own directly elected legislative assemblies, administrative, fiscal and legal systems and their own courts of law. It is therefore not for the UK to extend the application of the Sanctions set out in the Council Regulation (EU) 269/2014. Equivalent measures have been implemented by the Crown Dependencies, who have kept Her Majesty's Government updated about their activities in this area.</p><p> </p><p>Her Majesty's Government does not routinely request information on the value of particular assets held in the Crown Dependencies.</p><p> </p><p>The UK and the Crown Dependencies recognise the importance of working together to promote the application of high international standards and implementing sanctions and asset freezing measures.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North West Cambridgeshire answering member printed Mr Shailesh Vara grouped question UIN 193345 question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 1496 label Biography information for Shailesh Vara
tabling member	116 label Biography information for Lord Soames of Fletching

44819

registered interest
date	24/03/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what his policy is on the introduction of legally binding pre-nuptial agreements.
tabling member constituency	Strangford
tabling member printed	Jim Shannon
uin	193537
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 31/03/2014 answer text <p>The Law Commission published its report on Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements on 27 February 2014.</p><p> </p><p>The report focuses on clarifying the law in the areas of financial ‘need' and nuptial agreements and makes 3 broad recommendations:</p><p>1. that written guidance is produced on financial need;</p><p>2. that the feasibility is assessed of producing numerical guidance to help couples to calculate the likely financial outcome of divorce or dissolution; and</p><p>3. that pre-nuptial agreements are made statutorily binding.</p><p> </p><p>The Government is grateful to the Law Commission for their hard work on this complex area of law.</p><p> </p><p>The Government is giving the report careful consideration. An interim response will be published by August 2014 and a full response by February 2015. These are the timescales established in protocol between the Law Commission and Government.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Bermondsey and Old Southwark answering member printed Simon Hughes question first answered 31/03/2014 12:00:00 answering member 194 label Biography information for Simon Hughes
tabling member	4131 label Biography information for Jim Shannon