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
tabling member	label

Search

1352554

	registered interest
	date	03/09/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Cycling UK: Dangerous Driving
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with Cycling UK on the findings of its report into the law on exceptional hardship pleas in dangerous driving cases.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow North
	tabling member printed	Patrick Grady
	uin	41938
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/09/2021 answer text <p>The Justice Secretary has had no such discussions with Cycling UK.</p><p> </p><p>This is because road traffic offences are generally the responsibility of the Department for Transport, including driving disqualifications and the law on exceptional hardship pleas. The Ministry of Justice does however retain an interest in general criminal law and on offences that result in death or serious injury.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 13/09/2021 11:27:38 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4432 label Biography information for Patrick Grady

1349254

	registered interest
	date	21/07/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Employment Tribunals Service: Discrimination and Flexible Working
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of employment tribunals related to (a) flexible working and (b) gender discrimination in each year from 2014 to 2021.
	tabling member constituency	Hampstead and Kilburn
	tabling member printed	Tulip Siddiq
	uin	37552
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The latest information on how many and what proportion of Employment Tribunals complaints related to flexible working is provided in the table below. Data in respect of gender discrimination is not held but is included in the ‘Sex Discrimination’ jurisdiction, this relates to the protected characteristic ‘Sex’, ‘Marriage and Civil Partnership’ and ‘Gender reassignment’.</p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Financial Year</strong></p></td><td rowspan="2"><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td colspan="4"><p><strong>Type of Jurisdiction Complaint</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total Jurisdictional complaints</strong></p></td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Sex discrimination<sup>2</sup></strong></p></td><td colspan="2"><p><strong>Flexible Working<sup>3</sup></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013/14</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>198,586</p></td><td><p>13,722</p></td><td><p>7%</p></td><td><p>232</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2014/15</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>129,966</p></td><td><p>4,471</p></td><td><p>3%</p></td><td><p>103</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2015/16</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>178,079</p></td><td><p>5,380</p></td><td><p>3%</p></td><td><p>94</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2016/17</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>143,946</p></td><td><p>8,841</p></td><td><p>6%</p></td><td><p>103</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2017/18</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>172,731</p></td><td><p>5,522</p></td><td><p>3%</p></td><td><p>112</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2018/19</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>198,715</p></td><td><p>9,427</p></td><td><p>5%</p></td><td><p>174</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2019/20</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>175,389</p></td><td><p>6,260</p></td><td><p>4%</p></td><td><p>176</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2020/21</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>186,788</p></td><td><p>5,172</p></td><td><p>3%</p></td><td><p>133</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><p>The data has been taken from case management system and may differ slightly to that of the published stats as this data was run on a different date.</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Notes</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><p>1) A claim may be brought under more than one jurisdiction or subsequently amended or clarified in the course of proceedings but will be counted only once.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><p>2) The 'Sex Discrimination' jurisdiction includes complaints made in relation to the protected characteristics 'Sex', 'Marriage and Civil Partnership' and 'Gender reassignment'.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><p>3) Suffer a detriment and/or dismissal for claiming under the flexible working regulations or be subject to a breach of procedure.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The number of claims received by the Employment Tribunals is published by the Ministry of Justice (quarterly) and can be found at:</p><p> </p><p>www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-october-to-december-2020.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 13:01:39 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4518 label Biography information for Tulip Siddiq

1349444

	registered interest
	date	22/07/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Judiciary
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent steps he has taken to uphold and protect the independence of the judiciary.
	tabling member constituency	Putney
	tabling member printed	Fleur Anderson
	uin	38427
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The Lord Chancellor is committed to his statutory duty under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to defend judicial independence. An independent judiciary is one of the cornerstones of the United Kingdom’s constitution and vital to the proper functioning of our democracy based on the rule of law. Judges must be free to make their judicial decisions without being subject to interference by Parliament or the executive.</p><p>The Lord Chancellor is consistently clear on the importance of an independent judiciary both privately and publicly including when answering questions about the importance of parliamentarians respecting judicial independence to the House of Commons Justice Committee in December 2020; and in his recent speeches at Queen Mary University in March 2021 and at the Lord Mayor’s Dinner for HM Judges in July 2021.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 12:08:37 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4788 label Biography information for Fleur Anderson

1349580

	registered interest
	date	22/07/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Courts: Coronavirus
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the consequences are for a (a) witness, (b) defendant, (c) complainant, (d) juror, (e) judicial office holder, (f) court employee and (g) visiting member of the public who does not wear a face mask in accordance with the mandatory covid-19 face covering policy in place from 19 July 2021.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	38195
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions across respective parts of Great Britain this summer has allowed courts and tribunals to operate more flexibly, and so increasingly efficiently. But notwithstanding the success of the Government’s vaccine rollout, some safety measures must continue to remain in place.</p><p>There has never been a legal requirement to wear face coverings in a court or tribunal building. Regulations on the wearing of face coverings in place before 19 July in England, imposing criminal sanctions backed by appropriate enforcement powers, applied only in prescribed sectors like retail and transport. However, Public Health guidance has for some time made clear the benefits associated with face coverings, which other sectors have been encouraged to follow. Face coverings can help to minimise exposure to the virus, and therefore reduce the risk of transmission. Accordingly, and alongside a range of other measures embedded to manage Covid risks, in July 2020 HM Courts and Tribunals Service introduced a policy asking that face coverings be worn (unless exempt) across its estate, for the reasons set out in its <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1012423/HMCTS589_Organisational_Risk_Assessment_A4L_Aug21_v1.pdf" target="_blank">Organisational Risk Assessment</a>.</p><p>Given the lack of any prescribed legal requirement to wear face coverings in court and tribunal buildings, the compliance and enforcement options open to HMCTS before the 19th July are essentially the same as those after 19<sup>th</sup> July. In determining its policy, HMCTS has considered a range of factors, including the clear balance to be struck between ensuring reasonable compliance of the policy on face coverings, and not damaging the efficacy of proceedings before the court (for example, allowing those who are legally compelled to attend court to avoid that appearance by refusing to wear a covering).</p><p>Insofar as members of staff are concerned, HMCTS employees will continue to be required to wear face coverings in court and tribunal buildings, unless exemptions apply. All HMCTS employees have an obligation to follow HR policies. The consequences of non-compliance would be dealt with, as appropriate, under usual personnel management procedures. Members of the judiciary are similarly asked to wear face coverings in certain areas of court and tribunal buildings (not including, for example, whilst presiding in hearing rooms). Any compliance issues would be a matter for the leadership judiciary, not HMCTS.</p><p>For court and tribunal users including parties, witnesses, jurors, and members of the public, Court and Tribunal Security Officers (CTSOs) will ask that face coverings are worn upon entry into the buildings and will provide free face coverings if needed. Signage around the buildings make clear where face coverings are to be worn. Ultimately, under the Courts Act 2003 section 53, CTSOs have the power to exclude or remove any person from a building for the purposes of securing the safety of those in the building – which includes for these purposes considering non-compliance with reasonable requests in respect of face coverings introduced and maintained in line with prevailing Public Health guidance. In assessing the need for (and proportionality of) deploying those exclusion/removal powers, CTSOs (acting in consultation with HMCTS managers and the judiciary as necessary) will have regard to the balance between furthering public safety, and ensuring the ongoing efficacy of proceedings, as described above.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 12:25:40 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1349612

	registered interest
	date	22/07/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Ministry of Justice: Protective Clothing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what his current policy is on the wearing of face coverings in his (a) Department, (b) departmental agencies and (c) related bodies during the covid-19 outbreak.
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	uin	38211
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>Throughout the pandemic, the Civil Service / Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has followed, and continues to follow, the latest government guidance in relation to managing the risk of COVID-19 in the workplace, including any variations between the four nations of the UK.</p><p> </p><p>In England, the BEIS ‘Working Safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)’ guidance provides sensible precautions employers can take to manage risk and support their staff. The guidance is available via this link: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-covid-19/offices-factories-and-labs#offices-7-2" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-covid-19/offices-factories-and-labs#offices-7-2</a>.</p><p> </p><p>It is for individual employers to determine which mitigations are appropriate to adopt as they review their workplace risk assessments in light of the updated guidance. Face coverings, which are no longer required by law, are one possible mitigation employers could adopt if the situation / context warranted it.</p><p> </p><p>The MoJ fully supports individuals who choose to wear a face covering in the workplace.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 12:10:34 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1350855

	registered interest
	date	18/08/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Probate
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to (a) tackle delays with probate applications and (b) improve communication between probate offices and applicants.
	tabling member constituency	York Outer
	tabling member printed	Julian Sturdy
	uin	40870
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The most recently published information regarding combined waiting times for a grant of probate, on paper and digital cases, covers January 2021 to March 2021 and is published on gov.uk via Family Court Statistics Quarterly (Table 25):</p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021</a></p><p>Despite the unprecedented challenges faced by the probate service during the Covid 19 pandemic, and as a result of HMCTS increasing resources to meet demand, the average length of time taken for a grant of probate following receipt of the documents required has been maintained at between four to six weeks.</p><p>HMCTS continues to listen to user feedback and to invest in the improvement of the online Probate system to make it more accessible and easier for applicants to understand.</p><p>Improvements have also been made to communication routes. As of March 2020, all calls are now answered by the Courts &amp; Tribunals Service Centres, which are equipped with modern technology to monitor performance levels and make improvements to the service being offered.</p><p>Contact channels and operating hours have also been extended to meet user needs meaning the service can now be contacted via:</p><ul><li>webchat available at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/applying-for-probate/apply-for-probate" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/applying-for-probate/apply-for-probate</a> (Monday to Friday 8am to 8pm and Saturday 8am to 2pm).</li><li>telephone on 0300 303 0648 (Monday to Friday 8am to 6pm and Saturday 8am to 2pm).</li><li>email at contactprobate@justice.gov.uk</li></ul><p>For professional users, real time information about the progress of digital cases can now be obtained via the online Probate service without the need to contact HMCTS.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 11:17:47 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4079 label Biography information for Julian Sturdy

1350861

	registered interest
	date	18/08/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Probate: Standards
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department has taken to tackle delays in the probate system.
	tabling member constituency	Battersea
	tabling member printed	Marsha De Cordova
	uin	41219
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The most recently published information regarding combined waiting times for a grant of probate, on paper and digital cases, covers January 2021 to March 2021 and is published on gov.uk via Family Court Statistics Quarterly (Table 25):</p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021</a></p><p>Despite the unprecedented challenges faced by the probate service during the Covid 19 pandemic, and as a result of HMCTS increasing resources to meet demand, the average length of time taken for a grant of probate following receipt of the documents required has been maintained at between four to six weeks.</p><p>HMCTS continues to invest in the improvement of the online Probate system which was developed as part of the wider HMCTS Reform Programme to further streamline ways of working resulting in a system that is simpler and easy to understand for applicants; is accessible; and more efficient and robust to run.</p><p>The introduction of digital systems and bulk scanning has proved vital during the Covid 19 pandemic, allowing HMCTS staff to continue to process incoming applications and allowing Court users to access Probate services remotely.</p><p>The Exela contract is managed in line with MOJ Policy for strategic contracts and is therefore subject to the highest levels of governance to ensure service delivery. More than half a million documents were scanned without error in 2020 and on the rare occasions where errors occur, the majority of documents are re-scanned within 24 hours of a request being made.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp grouped question UIN 41220 question first answered 10/09/2021 11:32:37 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4676 label Biography information for Marsha De Cordova

1350862

	registered interest
	date	18/08/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Exela Technologies: Probate
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the role of Exela Technologies in the efficiency of the probate process.
	tabling member constituency	Battersea
	tabling member printed	Marsha De Cordova
	uin	41220
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>The most recently published information regarding combined waiting times for a grant of probate, on paper and digital cases, covers January 2021 to March 2021 and is published on gov.uk via Family Court Statistics Quarterly (Table 25):</p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2021</a></p><p>Despite the unprecedented challenges faced by the probate service during the Covid 19 pandemic, and as a result of HMCTS increasing resources to meet demand, the average length of time taken for a grant of probate following receipt of the documents required has been maintained at between four to six weeks.</p><p>HMCTS continues to invest in the improvement of the online Probate system which was developed as part of the wider HMCTS Reform Programme to further streamline ways of working resulting in a system that is simpler and easy to understand for applicants; is accessible; and more efficient and robust to run.</p><p>The introduction of digital systems and bulk scanning has proved vital during the Covid 19 pandemic, allowing HMCTS staff to continue to process incoming applications and allowing Court users to access Probate services remotely.</p><p>The Exela contract is managed in line with MOJ Policy for strategic contracts and is therefore subject to the highest levels of governance to ensure service delivery. More than half a million documents were scanned without error in 2020 and on the rare occasions where errors occur, the majority of documents are re-scanned within 24 hours of a request being made.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp grouped question UIN 41219 question first answered 10/09/2021 11:32:37 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4676 label Biography information for Marsha De Cordova

1350918

	registered interest
	date	18/08/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: Coronavirus
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of compatibility of the Single Justice Procedure in respect of prosecutions under covid-19 related legislation and the right to fair trial principles.
	tabling member constituency	Brighton, Pavilion
	tabling member printed	Caroline Lucas
	uin	40826
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>A case dealt with under the Single Justice Procedure is dealt with in the same way as any other case, except that a single magistrate can deal with it (rather than two) and the hearing need not be in public. The magistrate must comply with the same legislative safeguards as all other proceedings, and the Sentencing Council Sentencing Guidelines apply in the same way.</p><p> </p><p>The Single Justice Procedure is a quicker and more straightforward procedure, and there are a number of further safeguards built into the process to ensure a defendant’s right to a fair trial is protected. A defendant must agree to this procedure being used and they have the option to opt out of the Single Justice Procedure and have their case heard in open court, at any time before sentencing. A magistrate can also refer a case to open court if they deem it would not be appropriately dealt with using the procedure. Furthermore, if a defendant was unaware of the proceedings, they are entitled to make a statutory declaration which revokes the conviction and recommences the proceedings.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 10/09/2021 11:56:10 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	3930 label Biography information for Caroline Lucas

1351167

	registered interest
	date	18/08/2021
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Immigration: Appeals
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cases were waiting to be listed by the Immigration Appeal Tribunal on 31 August 2021.
	tabling member constituency	Edmonton
	tabling member printed	Kate Osamor
	uin	41082
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/09/2021 answer text <p>As at 31 March 2021 the number of cases without a hearing date:</p><p>a) In the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) was 17,334.</p><p>b) In the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) was 1,086.</p><p> </p><p>These figures include appeals that have been adjourned following an initial hearing.</p><p> </p><p>The average waiting time from receipt to the first substantive hearing in the period April 2020 to March 2021</p><p>a) in the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) was 40 weeks</p><p>b) in the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) was 17 weeks.</p><p> </p><p>Figures are provided for the most recent time period covered by official statistics.</p><p> </p><p>Since the outset of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic steps have been taken to increase listing with the introduction of remote hearings and the return of face-to-face hearings in covid-secure tribunal buildings.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp grouped question UIN 41083 question first answered 10/09/2021 11:40:39 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
	tabling member	4515 label Biography information for Kate Osamor