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 question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

100080

	registered interest
	date	21/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Judicial Review
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many judicial reviews there were involving Government departments according to records held by the (a) Treasury Solicitor and (b) Administrative Court Office in each of the last four years; and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	211271
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department holds records relating only to those cases in which it has acted. The Treasury Solicitor represents most, but not all, government departments in litigation. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. According to records held by the Treasury Solicitor, the number of judicial reviews involving government departments in which it has acted in each of the last four years is as follows:</p><p>2010 – 8,566</p><p>2011 – 9,603</p><p>2012 – 10,274</p><p>2013 – 16,449</p><p>Information relating to how many of those reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each year is not held centrally and could not be created without incurring disproportionate cost.</p><p><del class="ministerial">The Administrative Court Office does not collate the information requested centrally and determining the number of reviews and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part would incur a disproportionate cost.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The information requested in respect of the Administrative Court Office is published online at <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a> . The 2013 data is not currently available.</ins></p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 28/10/2014 15:10:43 question first ministerially corrected 05/01/2015 17:35:17 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 24759 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1437520

	registered interest
	date	02/03/2022
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Rape: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether she plans to implement the recommendations from the Criminal Justice Joint Inspection into the police and CPS's response to rape post-charge in full; what her timetable is for implementing those recommendations; and if she will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	133142
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/03/2022 answer text The CPS has welcomed the recent Criminal Justice Joint Inspection (CJJI) report on how well the criminal justice system serves survivors of rape and has largely accepted all the recommendations within it that relate directly to their work. They will use the report’s findings and recommendations to further inform their response to rape prosecutions and to build on the significant work undertaken so far, which has focussed on the following three main areas of work:<ul><li>better collaboration with the police from the very start of an investigation, taking an offender-centric approach to case-building;</li><li>supporting prosecutors and expanding the size of specialist units so that they are properly resourced to respond to these challenging and complex cases; and</li><li>improving the support given to victims, and recognising the trauma they experience.</li></ul>On the timeframes for implementing the two recommendations relating to communicating with victims, the CPS has already commenced a vital programme of work to improve how they communicate with victims. As part of this, the CPS has commissioned crucial research into victims’ needs to understand what victims need and want, so the CPS can serve them better. This research is part of a fundamental review into how the CPS can improve communication with victims. Although this three-phased programme is underway, the CPS will require time to complete it, to ensure that it fundamentally improves the quality of communication with victims. The CPS’s full response to the report and its recommendations can be found <a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-response-criminal-justice-joint-inspection-cjji-how-well-criminal-justice-system" target="_blank">here</a>. answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk question first answered 07/03/2022 09:36:16 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1503594

	registered interest
	date	02/09/2022
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how much the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) spent on the (a) prosecution trials brought against ENRC and (b) SFO defence against ENRC counter claims lawsuit.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	45309
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/09/2022 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has an ongoing investigation into ENRC. There are no prosecutions, and therefore no associated costs, at this stage. The ENRC have brought two civil actions for alleged misfeasance against the SFO. This matter remains ongoing and as such the final costs are not yet determined.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 08/09/2022 11:57:47 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1503596

	registered interest
	date	02/09/2022
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how much the Serious Fraud Office spent on the (a) Employment Tribunal and (b) subsequent appeal brought by a former ENRC case-controller who was dismissed.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	45321
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/09/2022 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>An Employment Tribunal has not been brought by a former ENRC case-controller against the Serious Fraud Office.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 08/09/2022 12:17:17 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1402653

	registered interest
	date	13/01/2022
	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, pursuant to the oral Answer of 6 January 2022, Official Report, column 146, on the Criminal Justice System: Disclosure between Parties, when the independent review on the disclosure failings at the Serious Fraud Office will commence; who will be conducting that review; and what the (a) timescale and (b) terms of reference for that review are.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	103528
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/01/2022 answer text <p>The details of the review, including the intended timescales and the terms of reference, will be published once they have been agreed. I am committed to ensuring that this review is conducted as quickly as possible.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk question first answered 18/01/2022 09:08:19 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1503595

	registered interest
	date	02/09/2022
	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 much her Department spent on the (a) Calvert-Smith review and (b) Altman review of the Serious Fraud Office.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	45319
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/09/2022 answer text <p>The costs of Sir David Calvert-Smith’s independent review into the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) handling of the Unaoil case (<em>R. v Akle &amp; Anor</em>), which was commissioned by the Attorney General, are still being finalised. The costs to date to the Attorney General’s Office are £84,571.90. There are some costs outstanding, but it is anticipated these will not increase the overall cost of the review significantly. The total costs will be recovered from the SFO.</p><p> </p><p>The cost of Brian Altman QC’s independent review of the collapse of <em>R v. Woods &amp; Marshall</em>, which was commissioned by the Director of the SFO, was £359,442.37. This was paid for by the SFO.</p><p> </p><p>Both reviews presented valuable recommendations and the implementation of these remain a priority for the Law Officers and the Director of the SFO.</p> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 08/09/2022 12:00:36 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

172867

	registered interest
	date	09/01/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Government Departments: Judicial Review
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what amount each Government department has spent on external legal fees relating to each case involving substantive judicial review hearings since May 2010; and what the outcome of the proceedings was in each such case.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	220247
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/01/2015 answer text <p>The Treasury Solicitor conducts most, but not all, litigation on behalf of government departments. For example, Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs normally conducts its own litigation. In 2014 the Treasury Solicitor acted in about 17846 judicial reviews.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Treasury Solicitor’s Department does not hold central records on the external legal fees paid in each individual case or on the outcome of each such case. Such information could not be created without examining every case file and thus incurring disproportionate costs.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In relation to external fees, the Attorney General maintains five panels of junior counsel to undertake civil and EC work for all Government Departments. There are three London panels (an A panel for senior juniors, a B panel for middle juniors and a C panel for junior juniors) together with a Regional panel and a Public International Law panel. This is in addition to First Treasury Counsel (FTC) who exclusively does Government work, and to the Standing Counsel to certain Departments. <br></p><p> </p><p>The hourly rates for panel counsel are as follows:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>First Treasury Counsel - £230</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>A panel - £120</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>B panel - £80</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>C panel - £60 if under 5 years call and £80 if over 5 years call.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In relation to outcomes, the Ministry of Justice publish figures on the number of Judicial Reviews by each Department up to 2012:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>See Table 4.3 at the link below:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267408/additional-court-tables-2012.xls</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This shows the number of cases each year where Government departments were named as first defendant and where the judicial review was granted following a substantive hearing.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 14/01/2015 17:46:29 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

168136

	registered interest
	date	05/12/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Driving Offences: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many people were prosecuted for driving cars while (a) disqualified from driving and (b) uninsured in each police force area in the UK in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Mr Andy Slaughter
	uin	217583
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/12/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not centrally record the total number of people prosecuted for driving whilst disqualified or driving whilst uninsured. To obtain details of the number of defendants prosecuted for these offences, would require a manual review of individual case files to be undertaken at a disproportionate cost.</p><p>Driving motor vehicles while uninsured are specified proceedings. These are offences that are prosecuted by the police rather than the CPS in order to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and ensure swifter justice. The CPS will only prosecute a specified offence in cases where a not guilty plea has been entered or when the defendant is charged with other associated offences such as driving with excess alcohol.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 10/12/2014 12:53:20 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

443315

	registered interest
	date	07/01/2016
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Juries
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 5 January 2016 to Question 20564, how many people were charged with jury (a) intimidation and (b) tampering in each of the last five years.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	21435
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/01/2016 answer text <p>Section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 creates two offences:</p><p>S.51(1) creates an offence directed at acts against a person who assists in an investigation of an offence or who is a witness or potential witness or juror or potential juror whilst an investigation or trial is in progress</p><p>S.51(2) creates an offence directed at acts against a person who assisted in an investigation of an offence or who was a witness or juror after an investigation or trial has been concluded.</p><p>The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) identify the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts, rather than the number of defendants prosecuted. A single defendant may be prosecuted for multiple offences.</p><p>The number of offences charged under s.51(1) and s.51(2) are as follows:</p><br /><table><tbody><tr><td><p><br></p></td><td><p><br></p></td><td><p>2010-2011</p></td><td><p>2011-2012</p></td><td><p>2012-2013</p></td><td><p>2013-2014</p></td><td><p>2014-2015</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(1)</p></td><td><p>Intimidate a witness / juror</p></td><td><p>3,275</p></td><td><p>2,630</p></td><td><p>2,148</p></td><td><p>2,066</p></td><td><p>2,202</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(2)</p></td><td><p>Do an act which harmed a witness / juror</p></td><td><p>102</p></td><td><p>166</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>109</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(2)</p></td><td><p>Threaten a witness / juror</p></td><td><p>240</p></td><td><p>172</p></td><td><p>118</p></td><td><p>122</p></td><td><p>129</p></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><p>The proportion of CPS cases that result in a guilty plea has increased from 67.2% in 10/11 to 74.5% in 14/15 which means that there are fewer cases that are likely to be subject to the sorts of acts covered by s.51(1) during the course of the prosecution.</p><p>Also, s.51(1) covers intimidation of juror or potential jurors. The number of crown court trials have also been reducing over the period in question by 9.5%, again resulting in fewer cases where S.51(1) offences are likely to apply.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 13/01/2016 15:14:30 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

423503

	registered interest
	date	23/10/2015
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Ministers: Codes of Practice
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what discussions he has had with his ministerial colleagues in the Cabinet Office on the removal from the Ministerial Code of a reference to Ministers having a duty to comply with the law including international law and treaty obligations and to uphold the administration of justice.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	13253
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2015 answer text <p>Information relating to internal discussion and advice is not normally disclosed.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 28/10/2015 14:39:43 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter