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 question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1019521

registered interest
date	03/12/2018
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Administration of Justice
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the Government is taking to ensure that access to justice is maintained after the implementation period of the Withdrawal Agreement.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Keith Vaz
uin	198178
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/12/2018 answer text <p>The ability of individuals to resolve their legal problems is vital to the rule of law and the government will continue its commitment to maintain access to justice.</p><p> </p><p>The Political Declaration establishes the parameters of an ambitious, broad and flexible future partnership between the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU). This includes a commitment to explore options for a new agreement on family judicial cooperation. It also sets out the ambition for a future security partnership, which will provide for comprehensive, close, balanced and reciprocal law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.</p><p> </p><p>We have also reached agreement with the EU on how existing civil and criminal judicial cooperation cases will be brought to their conclusion in the event that we are unable to reach an agreement on a satisfactory future relationship at the end of the implementation period.</p><ul><li>On civil, we have broadly agreed with the EU that if proceedings are started ahead of the end of the implementation period, they will be concluded under the existing EU rules and that subsequent judgments in those proceedings will also be enforced.</li></ul><ul><li>On criminal, any request for judicial cooperation before the end of the Implementation Period, under the EU measures that remain in force during the IP, will proceed until it is concluded under the applicable EU rules. This applies both to requests accepted by the UK and those requests made by the UK to remaining member states.</li></ul> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 11/12/2018 12:28:39 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
tabling member	338 label Biography information for Keith Vaz

1652736

registered interest
date	13/07/2023
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Asylum: Legal Opinion
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has made a recent assessment of the adequacy of the legal advice available to people making an asylum claim.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	194090
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/07/2023 answer text <p>Under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, all immigration advisers must be registered with the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) or be regulated by a Designated Qualifying Regulator (DQR). The OISC and the DQRs are responsible for ensuring immigration advisers are fit, competent, and act in their clients’ best interests.</p><p>The DQRs include legal services representative bodies who designate regulatory responsibilities to legal services regulators. Legal services regulation is independent of Government and the relevant regulators are responsible for ensuring quality and standards for providers of legal advice.</p><p>The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is a DQR and responsible for the regulation of solicitors and ensuring that all solicitors meet required standards. In November 2022, the SRA published a thematic review of immigration and asylum services as well as updated immigration guidance to help solicitors understand their obligations when providing immigration advice. The guidance is available here: <a href="https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/resources/immigration-services/guidance-and-support/" target="_blank">https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/resources/immigration-services/guidance-and-support/</a>.</p> answering member constituency Finchley and Golders Green answering member printed Mike Freer question first answered 21/07/2023 11:58:35 answering member 4004 label Biography information for Mike Freer
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1239993

registered interest
date	02/10/2020
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Crimes against the Person: Migrant Workers
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 enable overseas workers who are victims of corporate harm in the UK to access the UK courts.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	98788
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/10/2020 answer text <p>In cross-border cases, there are well established rules and procedures that determine whether a court in the UK has jurisdiction to determine a case.</p><p> </p><p>This will include considering factors such as where the defendant in the case is based, or whether they can be served a claim in the UK. The court may also consider whether the alleged damage or loss was sustained within the UK or resulted from an act committed within the UK.</p><p> </p><p>Subject to certain limited exceptions, Article 4.1 of the Recast Brussels Regulation confers a right on any claimant (regardless of their domicile) to sue a UK domiciled defendant in a UK court.</p><p> </p><p>The Government has no plans to legislate to amend the current position in law.</p><p> </p><p>From 11pm on 31<sup>st</sup> December 2020 the UK will no longer be party to the Recast Brussels Regulation. Transitional provisions will apply in cases where proceedings have been instituted before that date (so that the Brussels rules will still apply in those cases).</p><p> </p><p>For cases where the Brussels Regulation does not apply, and where proceedings are instituted after the end of the Transition Period, the domestic private international law rules – in a case like the one mentioned, those of England and Wales - will apply to determine where such cases will be heard. Each of the three jurisdictions in the UK have their own rules. Under the rules in England and Wales, the primary factor determining where a case may be heard relates to where the claimant needs to serve the claim against the defendant. If the defendant is present within England and Wales (even temporarily) such that service can take place, then the court in England and Wales is able to take jurisdiction (although the defendant may seek to dispute that). If service in England and Wales is not possible, the claimant will need to obtain permission from the court to serve proceedings overseas (subject to certain limited exceptions).</p><p> </p><p>The UK has applied to rejoin the Lugano Convention 2007. This has similar jurisdiction rules to the Brussels recast Regulation. If the UK’s application is accepted, then broadly speaking, in any case where Lugano applied jurisdiction would once again primarily turn on the domicile of the defendant.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 12/10/2020 15:59:13 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1293692

registered interest
date	01/03/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judges: Disciplinary Proceedings
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) ethnicity and (b) gender was of the judges referred (i) informally and (ii) formally for disciplinary action since 2015; and what the (A) ethnicity and (B) gender was of the complainant in each of those cases.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	160867
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office does not record the diversity profile of complainants, or of judges who are subject to disciplinary action.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 09/03/2021 17:51:40 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1293690

registered interest
date	01/03/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judges: Resignations
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many complainant judges have left their judicial appointment prior to normal retirement age after issuing a grievance alleging race, sex, sexual orientation or disability discrimination in the last two years.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	160865
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>There are no central records of how many complainant judges have left their judicial appointment prior to normal retirement age after issuing a grievance alleging race, sex, sexual orientation or disability discrimination. Information about judicial office holders who leave prior to retirement is not compared with grievance records.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 09/03/2021 17:50:46 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1645980

registered interest
date	20/06/2023
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judges: Training
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Senior Coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths report following the Plymouth mass shooting, when she plans to (a) put in place the recommended firearms licensing training for Crown Court judges and (b) ensure that only judges who have undergone this training are authorised to hear appeals against licensing decisions under section 44 of the Firearms Act 1968.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	190432
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/06/2023 answer text <p>To preserve the independence of the judiciary, the Lord Chief Justice, Senior President of Tribunals and Chief Coroner have statutory responsibility for judicial training, under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, and Coroners and Justice Act 2009 respectively. These responsibilities are exercised through the Judicial College.</p><p>The Judicial College regularly reviews its training offer to ensure that all judicial office holders receive up-to-date and high-quality training. The judiciary is responsible for determining which judges hear appeals against licensing decisions.</p><p>The Lord Chief Justice’s response to the Prevention of Future Deaths Report is publicly available and can be accessed here: <a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023-0085-Response-from-Lord-Chief-Justice-of-England-and-Wales-.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023-0085-Response-from-Lord-Chief-Justice-of-England-and-Wales-.pdf</a>.</p> answering member constituency Finchley and Golders Green answering member printed Mike Freer question first answered 28/06/2023 13:53:37 answering member 4004 label Biography information for Mike Freer
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1293681

registered interest
date	01/03/2021
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, for what reason recruitment, retention and promotion targets are not used in the judiciary.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	160864
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>Judges are selected following a rigorous, independent and merit-based process which is key to maintaining the quality, integrity and independence of our judiciary.</p><p>The Judicial Appointments Commission is asked by the Lord Chancellor to deliver a specified programme of judicial recruitment each year and reports against this in its annual report. The Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Committees are also asked to recruit a specified number of magistrates each year.</p><p>We do not consider that diversity targets on recruitment, retention or promotion are the right approach. The Lord Chancellor, Lord Chief Justice and the Judicial Appointments Commission have statutory duties to improve judicial diversity and through the Judicial Diversity Forum, are delivering a wide range of actions to improve judicial diversity.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 09/03/2021 17:49:22 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1293693

registered interest
date	01/03/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judiciary: Bullying
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what bullying, harassment and anti-discrimination policies apply to members of the Judiciary; what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of training offered in respect of that policy; and whether such training is provided to all (a) full-time and (b) part-time office holders.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	160868
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>There are three related Judicial Grievance policies which cover complaints of bullying, harassment and/or discrimination, systemic complaints and complaints of broader wrongdoing. The grievance policies provide a framework for raising complaints formally or informally. These apply to all judicial office holders; salaried and fee-paid including the magistracy. In addition, the Judicial Guide to Conduct offers assistance to judges, coroners and magistrates about their conduct through the provision of a set of core principles.</p><p>The Lord Chief Justice (LCJ), the Senior President of the Tribunals, and the Chief Coroner have statutory responsibility for judicial training, under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, and Coroners and Justice Act 2009 respectively. As judicial training is a matter for the independent judiciary, no assessment of training is undertaken by the Ministry of Justice</p><p>All new Judicial Office Holders attend courses which include sessions on Conduct and Ethics which make specific reference to the 2012 Equality and Diversity Policy for the Judiciary and the Dignity at Work statement it contains, and further training is provided for judges when they are new to leadership roles.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 09/03/2021 17:51:02 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe

1146759

registered interest
date	27/09/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judiciary: Ministers
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made an assessment of the adequacy of the guidance issued to Ministers on relations with the judiciary.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Keith Vaz
uin	291538
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/10/2019 answer text <p>Section 3(1) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 requires that all Ministers of the Crown must uphold the continued independence of the judiciary. Paragraph 16 of the introduction and Chapter 6 of the Cabinet Manual make clear that the judiciary is independent of both the government of the day and Parliament. All ministers have access to legal advice in relation to their statutory duties, including advice where appropriate from Law Officers.</p><p>The Lord Chancellor has taken an Oath to respect the rule of law and defend the independence of the judiciary, which means that if required he will remind Ministerial colleagues of the importance of judicial independence and the rule of law. I am confident that my Ministerial colleagues understand their duties in this regard.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 03/10/2019 14:37:15 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	338 label Biography information for Keith Vaz

1293697

registered interest
date	01/03/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Judiciary: Public Appointments
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether secret soundings are taken from leadership judges or other automatic consultees on the suitability of an individual for judicial appointment.
tabling member constituency	Leicester East
tabling member printed	Claudia Webbe
uin	160871
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/03/2021 answer text <p>Consultation with the judiciary in relation to judicial recruitment is provided for in statute.</p><p>The independent Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) has the responsibility to run selection exercises and make recommendations to judicial posts up to and including the High Court. The JAC has a statutory duty to only select people for judicial appointment only on merit and who are of good character, in line with section 63 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.</p><p>As part of the selection process, a range of shortlisting and selection day tools are used to assess candidates. The Lord Chief Justice and another person who held the office for which the candidate is applying or has relevant experience are also consulted on the applicant, in line with section 30(1) of the Judicial Appointments Regulations 2013 to ensure that candidates are of good character and have relevant capabilities for the role. Further information on the JAC’s selection process regarding the suitability of candidates for appointments is available at – <a href="https://judicialappointments.gov.uk/guidance-on-the-application-process-2/" target="_blank">https://judicialappointments.gov.uk/guidance-on-the-application-process-2/</a></p><p>For judges above the High Court an independent selection panel is convened as set out in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. In line with those provisions, the commission, consisting of non-legally qualified members, judicial members and members of the JAC, will determine and apply the selection process required and will consult key officials and senior members of the judiciary on the candidates.</p><p>For appointments to the UK Supreme Court, a selection panel is convened. The panel consists of the UKSC President, a member from the JAC, the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland, the Northern Ireland JAC and a Senior UK Judge in line with Part 3 (11) of the UK Supreme Court Regulations 2013. The panel will determine and apply the selection process required and consult with the senior judiciary and senior officials on candidates, in line with Section 27 (1) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 09/03/2021 17:50:38 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4848 label Biography information for Claudia Webbe