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
hansard heading
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 attachment file name title previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

63459

	registered interest
	date	24/06/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Serious Fraud Office
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many (a) investigations were carried out, (b) individuals were charged, (c) corporates were charged, (d) criminal prosecutions were launched and (e) criminal convictions were secured by the Serious Fraud Office in (i) 2012-13 and (ii) each of the five preceding years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	201977
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>11 convictions were secured in 2013/14 and 16 prosecutions were completed in 2013/14 (including those with convictions).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigates and, where appropriate, prosecutes cases of serious or complex fraud (including cases of domestic or overseas bribery and corruption) which, in the opinion of the Director of the SFO, call for the multi-disciplinary approach and legislative powers available to the SFO. Since April 2012, the SFO’s caseload has been recalibrated so that it is taking on fewer and more complex cases, as envisaged by the Roskill model.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The SFO’s Intelligence Unit will assess all matters referred to the SFO whether by the public, the police or other agencies or organisations and refer those considered suitable for acceptance to a Case Evaluation Board before submission to the Director for his decision to open a criminal investigation under the Criminal Justice Act 1987.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>SFO investigations are complex, and this can sometimes lead to investigations merging or splitting into different parts. For instance, the Libor investigation is into numerous financial institutions, and there are other large investigations which have been subdivided.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The information requested for earlier years is contained in the following table.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2012/13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011/12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010/11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2009/10</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2008/09</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2007/08</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of investigations opened</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>18</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of individuals charged</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>57</p></td><td><p>31</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of corporates charged</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of convictions secured</p></td><td><p>14</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>17</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of prosecutions completed by defendant (including those convicted)</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>28</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>25</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 1: Two cases have been opened, closed, and then re-opened. These have been counted only once in the data above.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 2: Prior to April 2012 the SFO did not collate all of its casework data centrally and it is therefore possible that some records form this period may not have been identified. The SFO is currently carrying out a project to ensure that its reporting systems are more robust in the future.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 205065 205092 question first answered 01/09/2014 14:33:31 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

76971

	registered interest
	date	10/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Fraud: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many prosecutions have been completed by the Serious Fraud Office in 2013-14 and each of the previous five years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	205092
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>11 convictions were secured in 2013/14 and 16 prosecutions were completed in 2013/14 (including those with convictions).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigates and, where appropriate, prosecutes cases of serious or complex fraud (including cases of domestic or overseas bribery and corruption) which, in the opinion of the Director of the SFO, call for the multi-disciplinary approach and legislative powers available to the SFO. Since April 2012, the SFO’s caseload has been recalibrated so that it is taking on fewer and more complex cases, as envisaged by the Roskill model.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The SFO’s Intelligence Unit will assess all matters referred to the SFO whether by the public, the police or other agencies or organisations and refer those considered suitable for acceptance to a Case Evaluation Board before submission to the Director for his decision to open a criminal investigation under the Criminal Justice Act 1987.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>SFO investigations are complex, and this can sometimes lead to investigations merging or splitting into different parts. For instance, the Libor investigation is into numerous financial institutions, and there are other large investigations which have been subdivided.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The information requested for earlier years is contained in the following table.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2012/13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011/12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010/11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2009/10</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2008/09</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2007/08</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of investigations opened</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>18</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of individuals charged</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>57</p></td><td><p>31</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of corporates charged</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of convictions secured</p></td><td><p>14</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>17</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of prosecutions completed by defendant (including those convicted)</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>28</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>25</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 1: Two cases have been opened, closed, and then re-opened. These have been counted only once in the data above.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 2: Prior to April 2012 the SFO did not collate all of its casework data centrally and it is therefore possible that some records form this period may not have been identified. The SFO is currently carrying out a project to ensure that its reporting systems are more robust in the future.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 201977 205065 question first answered 01/09/2014 14:33:31 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

76975

	registered interest
	date	10/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Fraud: Convictions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many people have been convicted by the Serious Fraud Office in 2013-14 and each of the previous five years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	205065
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>11 convictions were secured in 2013/14 and 16 prosecutions were completed in 2013/14 (including those with convictions).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigates and, where appropriate, prosecutes cases of serious or complex fraud (including cases of domestic or overseas bribery and corruption) which, in the opinion of the Director of the SFO, call for the multi-disciplinary approach and legislative powers available to the SFO. Since April 2012, the SFO’s caseload has been recalibrated so that it is taking on fewer and more complex cases, as envisaged by the Roskill model.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The SFO’s Intelligence Unit will assess all matters referred to the SFO whether by the public, the police or other agencies or organisations and refer those considered suitable for acceptance to a Case Evaluation Board before submission to the Director for his decision to open a criminal investigation under the Criminal Justice Act 1987.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>SFO investigations are complex, and this can sometimes lead to investigations merging or splitting into different parts. For instance, the Libor investigation is into numerous financial institutions, and there are other large investigations which have been subdivided.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The information requested for earlier years is contained in the following table.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2012/13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011/12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010/11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2009/10</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2008/09</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2007/08</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of investigations opened</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>18</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of individuals charged</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>57</p></td><td><p>31</p></td><td><p>20</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of corporates charged</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of convictions secured</p></td><td><p>14</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>17</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Number of prosecutions completed by defendant (including those convicted)</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>28</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>25</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 1: Two cases have been opened, closed, and then re-opened. These have been counted only once in the data above.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note 2: Prior to April 2012 the SFO did not collate all of its casework data centrally and it is therefore possible that some records form this period may not have been identified. The SFO is currently carrying out a project to ensure that its reporting systems are more robust in the future.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 201977 205092 question first answered 01/09/2014 14:33:31 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

76651

	registered interest
	date	09/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Procurement
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how much and what proportion of the Law Officers' Departments' budget was spent on activities which were contracted out in (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11, (c) 2011-12, (d) 2012-13 and (e) 2013-14; and how much and what proportion of the Law Officers' Department's budget he expects to be contracted out in 2014-15.
	tabling member constituency	Tooting
	tabling member printed	Sadiq Khan
	uin	204893
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Tables showing the information requested for the Crown Prosecution Service and the Serious Fraud Office have been placed in the Library of the House.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The remaining Law Officers’ Departments are unable to provide any reliable estimates of the amount spent annually on contracted out services since 2009-10 without incurring a disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:56:03 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright attachment 1 file name Tables for deposit- PQ 204893 contracted work in LOD's.doc title Table - contracted out services - LOD's
	tabling member	1577 label Biography information for Sadiq Khan

76994

	registered interest
	date	10/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Crown Prosecution Service
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what steps he plans to take in response to the finding of HM Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Inspector in his Annual Report 2013-14, page 12, that there was a considerable decline in performance of the CPS in that year in relation to how it handled its disclosure obligations.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	205209
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The CPS is committed to the proper application of the disclosure provisions in the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 and is already engaged in a range of activities that will improve performance in this area:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>· A disclosure assurance regime is in place for Crown Court disclosure;</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>· The CPS contributed to the Kinch / Riddle review into disclosure in the magistrates’ courts and is implementing the recommendations as part of the cross-CJS efforts to transform summary justice. This will mean more targeted and effective disclosure at first hearing in magistrates’ courts; and</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>· CPS has addressed the recommendations of the Gross reviews and the HMCPSI review of disclosure in R v Mouncher to further improve performance.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The CPS continues to look at how compliance with the disclosure regime can be improved and will actively consider further initiatives as necessary.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 01/09/2014 15:08:08 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 10484 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

78986

	registered interest
	date	21/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Consultants
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 8 July 2014, Official Report, column 184W, on consultants, who the consultants were; what they were contracted to do; and how much each was paid.
	tabling member constituency	Leicester East
	tabling member printed	Keith Vaz
	uin	206676
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The information requested in respect of the Crown Prosecution Service was contained in an answer given to the Rt. Hon Member by the Attorney General on the 16<sup>th</sup> July (Official Report, Col 678W).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The table below contains details on the consultants used by the SFO since 2010-11.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Contractor</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Work type</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Amount (£)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>PA Consultancy</p></td><td><p>Support work for senior management</p></td><td><p>986k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>Corven</p></td><td><p>Development work relating to Deferred</p><p>Prosecution Agreements; coaching</p></td><td><p>480k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>SCC</p></td><td><p>IT consultancy</p></td><td><p>60k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>DTZ</p></td><td><p>Preparation of Business case for</p><p>relocation and satellite offices</p></td><td><p>24k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>Morland Consulting</p></td><td><p>Research &amp; Support Strategic</p><p>Risk Assessment</p></td><td><p>10k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>Processflows Ltd</p></td><td><p>IT consultancy</p></td><td><p>1k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>Ravn Systems Ltd</p></td><td><p>IT consultancy</p></td><td><p>7k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>PA Consultancy</p></td><td><p>Support work for senior</p><p>management</p></td><td><p>208k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>Corven</p></td><td><p>Consultancy work relating to</p><p>Deferred Prosecution Agreements</p></td><td><p>542k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>BNP Paribas</p></td><td><p>Lease surrender</p></td><td><p>61k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>Ravn Systems</p></td><td><p>IT consultancy</p></td><td><p>44k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>Hill and Knowlton</p></td><td><p>Communication advice</p></td><td><p>1k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012-13</p></td><td><p>PA Consultancy</p></td><td><p>Late invoice for work in</p><p>2011-12 (as above)</p></td><td><p>31k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013-14</p></td><td><p>SCC</p></td><td><p>IT consultancy</p></td><td><p>32k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013-14</p></td><td><p>CIO Partners</p></td><td><p>Preparation of specialist</p><p>IT specification</p></td><td><p>2k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013-14</p></td><td><p>Others*</p></td><td><p>Data management reviews</p></td><td><p>14k</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>* Two individuals carried out some work relating to an incident of data loss</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Note 1:</strong> Records for this type of expenditure were not properly documented prior to April 2012. Available records are summarised above:</p><p> </p><p><strong>Note 2:</strong> The combined total of costs for the year 2010/11 does not match SFO’s previously published figures. The previous figure was understated by £10k because of credits for late invoices relating to 2009/10 which had been incorrectly categorised as consultancy expenditure.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 01/09/2014 14:44:35 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	338 label Biography information for Keith Vaz

76970

	registered interest
	date	10/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of all (a) Crown Prosecution Service and (b) Serious Fraud Office cases were prosecuted by external counsel in 2013-14 and each of the five preceding years; and what the cost to each agency was of such counsel in each such year.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	205096
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) cases are not prosecuted exclusively by self-employed advocates or in-house advocates. Many cases are transferred between self-employed and in-house advocates and therefore it is not possible to report on the number or proportion of cases prosecuted solely by one type of advocate or the other.</p><p>However, the CPS does record the proportion of work undertaken across the 13 CPS Areas in the Crown Court by self-employed advocates by value, in accordance with the graduated fee scheme (GFS). CPS records show:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>Crown Court Advocacy (13 Area position)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>SELF-EMPLOYED ADVOCATES</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>% of prosecutions by GFS value</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008-09</p></td><td><p>78%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009-10</p></td><td><p>75%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>72%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>69%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012-13</p></td><td><p>70%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013-14</p></td><td><p>71%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The cost to the CPS of fees paid to self-employed advocates in relation to Crown Court and Higher Court advice, preparation and advocacy for each of the last six years is:</p><p> </p><p>2013-14: £114,606,541</p><p>2012-13: £110,608,524</p><p>2011-12; £111,041,044</p><p>2010-11: £134,194,869</p><p>2009-10: £135,296,368</p><p>2008-09: £127,132,677</p><p> </p><p>Note: Figures include VAT and are all fees paid to self-employed advocates not just those paid under the graduated fee scheme.</p><p>All of the cases prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Office in the Crown Court are prosecuted by external counsel. Costs associated with this are detailed in the following table.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td><p>2008/09</p></td><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>2013/14</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Fees to counsel relating</strong></p><p><strong> to prosecution work</strong></p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£3,146k</p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£2,313k</p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£3,651k</p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£4,008k</p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£3,548k</p></td><td><p> </p><p> </p><p>£4,167k</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:06:48 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

78781

	registered interest
	date	17/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Crown Court
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 16 July 2014, Official Report, column 678W, on Crown courts, what the number of defendants was in each category for each type of offence in 2013-14.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	206588
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>Further to the Answer provided on 16 July 2014, the number of defendants in each category for each type of offence in 2013-14 is shown in the table below:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td><p>(i)</p><p>Offer no evidence <strong>(</strong><strong>1</strong><strong>)</strong></p></td><td><p>(ii)</p><p>Judge ordered acquittal</p></td><td><p>(iii)</p><p>Judge directed acquittal</p></td><td><p>(iv)</p><p>Acquittal after trial</p></td><td><p>Total Prosecuted</p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>A Homicide</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>125</p></td><td><p><strong>910</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>B Offences Against</p><p>The Person</p></td><td><p>2,322</p></td><td><p>3,048</p></td><td><p>176</p></td><td><p>1,633</p></td><td><p><strong>21,223</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>C Sexual Offences</p></td><td><p>663</p></td><td><p>870</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>1,685</p></td><td><p><strong>8,755</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>D Burglary</p></td><td><p>806</p></td><td><p>1,192</p></td><td><p>48</p></td><td><p>278</p></td><td><p><strong>11,471</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>E Robbery</p></td><td><p>716</p></td><td><p>943</p></td><td><p>65</p></td><td><p>307</p></td><td><p><strong>6,810</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>F Theft And Handling</p></td><td><p>619</p></td><td><p>913</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>239</p></td><td><p><strong>6,854</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>G Fraud And Forgery</p></td><td><p>371</p></td><td><p>498</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>238</p></td><td><p><strong>5,433</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>H Criminal Damage</p></td><td><p>70</p></td><td><p>114</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p><strong>1,160</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>I Drugs Offences</p></td><td><p>565</p></td><td><p>823</p></td><td><p>32</p></td><td><p>307</p></td><td><p><strong>15,567</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>J Public Order Offences</p></td><td><p>438</p></td><td><p>628</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>233</p></td><td><p><strong>5,164</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>K All Other Offences</p><p>(excluding Motoring)</p></td><td><p>586</p></td><td><p>835</p></td><td><p>40</p></td><td><p>265</p></td><td><p><strong>5,895</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>L Motoring Offences</p></td><td><p>109</p></td><td><p>148</p></td><td><p>15</p></td><td><p>69</p></td><td><p><strong>2,233</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong><em>TOTAL Principal </em></strong></p><p><strong><em>Offence Categories</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>7,291</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>10,049</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>575</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>5,404</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>91,475</em></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Principal Offence</p><p>Category Not Allocated</p></td><td><p>504</p></td><td><p>665</p></td><td><p>45</p></td><td><p>180</p></td><td><p><strong>1,971</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>TOTAL</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7,795</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>10,714</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>620</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5,584</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>93,446</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p><p>Offered no evidence is a subset of Judge ordered acquittals.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:21:03 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

78635

	registered interest
	date	17/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Law Officers' Departments
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, which regulations of the Law Officers' Departments are under review; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	206416
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>No regulations are currently under review.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 13:56:14 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

78870

	registered interest
	date	18/07/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	EU Law
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many times the UK has lost EU infraction proceedings since May 2010 which relate to matters that fall within the Law Officers' Departments' responsibility.
	tabling member constituency	Wokingham
	tabling member printed	Mr John Redwood
	uin	206649
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>None. The UK has not been subject to infraction proceedings, during this period, which relate directly to matters within the Law Officers’ Departments’ areas of responsibility.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:02:07 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	14 label Biography information for Sir John Redwood