Ministry of Justice

The Government is committed to tackling drug use in prisons, which threatens prison safety and security, undermines our work to rehabilitate prisoners and drives reoffending. We therefore need to have a multi-pronged approach that tackles the supply of drugs, drives down demand and supports recovery – drug testing plays an important role in delivering this.

Random mandatory drug testing (rMDT) forms one part of our wider approach to tackling drug use in prisons. In custody, we also conduct more targeted testing, such as suspicion-based testing, when staff have reason to believe an individual has used drugs illicitly, as well as voluntary testing, which forms part of our approach on our Incentivised Substance Free Living Units, where prisoners sign a compact to remain drug free, receive access to improved conditions compared to a standard wing and are regularly tested. In probation settings, we are expanding our drug testing powers through the Sentencing Bill, meaning that any offender on licence can be tested.

We test for a wide range of substances and keep this under regular review to ensure we identify emerging trends to keep both staff and prisoners safe. Our new drug testing contract supports this by giving us greater flexibility to identify areas for improvement in our drug testing capabilities, ensuring we can keep pace with changing patterns of drug use and target support where it is most needed.

In recent years, levels of rMDT have fallen short across the estate because of staffing constraints, and as a result, volumes have not been sufficient nor consistently high enough to produce publishable data – though results are still used as part of adjudication proceedings. There has been some encouraging progress made in recent months to increase levels, and we will continue to keep performance under close review.

Women’s centres provide vital information, advice and support to women in contact with the criminal justice system, including those serving community sentences.

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) currently funds specialist support for women on probation through Commissioned Rehabilitative Services (CRS) delivered by third sector organisations, including providers of women’s centres. HMPPS is committed to ensuring CRS contracts deliver holistic, gender-specific support that meets women’s needs, informed by service users, stakeholders and providers.

The Ministry of Justice is providing a further £7.2 million this year to support the women’s community sector. This funding is aimed at building sustainability, expanding interventions and increasing capacity, including residential provision where needed. Funding for future years is subject to internal allocations.

As part of the Government’s efforts to crackdown on sex crimes, the Government has committed to extending Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) to twenty prisons, ramped up from the current four in the South West.

MMPSA is a pharmaceutical intervention prescribed by clinicians to individuals, based on clinical need; medication can be given in the form of testosterone suppressing medication known as anti-androgens and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs). There is evidence of serious medium and longer-term side effects and risks associated with taking anti-androgens, which need to be carefully monitored by clinicians whilst a patient is taking them.

MMPSA is most effective when used alongside psychological interventions which includes accredited offending behaviour programmes, coordinated support such as therapy and probation supervision. This integrated approach ensures that public safety is prioritised.

The evidence of outcomes related to a reduction in psychological distress is building. To strengthen our evidence base, the Government is going further than the Independent Sentencing Review recommendation by committing to extending and expanding the existing MMPSA feasibility pilot beyond the South-West region, to two additional regions, the North East and the North West, as the first steps towards a national roll-out. We are continuing to work closely with our partners across health and justice agencies to inform our plans for implementation throughout the Autumn.

Alongside the expansion of the pilot, we are working closely with experts to ensure all future decisions are based on strong evidence which prioritises public safety, including through our collaboration with Nottingham Trent University to conduct a Randomised Controlled Trial to understand the effectiveness of SSRIs in managing problematic sexual behaviours.

We are also conducting international research to inform our approach to MMPSA. This has included hosting an expert roundtable with international representation from Sweden and Germany, and targeted engagement with countries who use this medication, as recommended in the Review. A summary of the evidence available will be deposited in the House Library.

As the evidence builds, it is right we consider ways we can increase the use of MMPSA and we will continue to explore whether we might mandate this treatment in future.

As part of the Government’s efforts to crackdown on sex crimes, the Government has committed to extending Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) to twenty prisons, ramped up from the current four in the South West.

MMPSA is a pharmaceutical intervention prescribed by clinicians to individuals, based on clinical need; medication can be given in the form of testosterone suppressing medication known as anti-androgens and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs). There is evidence of serious medium and longer-term side effects and risks associated with taking anti-androgens, which need to be carefully monitored by clinicians whilst a patient is taking them.

MMPSA is most effective when used alongside psychological interventions which includes accredited offending behaviour programmes, coordinated support such as therapy and probation supervision. This integrated approach ensures that public safety is prioritised.

The evidence of outcomes related to a reduction in psychological distress is building. To strengthen our evidence base, the Government is going further than the Independent Sentencing Review recommendation by committing to extending and expanding the existing MMPSA feasibility pilot beyond the South-West region, to two additional regions, the North East and the North West, as the first steps towards a national roll-out. We are continuing to work closely with our partners across health and justice agencies to inform our plans for implementation throughout the Autumn.

Alongside the expansion of the pilot, we are working closely with experts to ensure all future decisions are based on strong evidence which prioritises public safety, including through our collaboration with Nottingham Trent University to conduct a Randomised Controlled Trial to understand the effectiveness of SSRIs in managing problematic sexual behaviours.

We are also conducting international research to inform our approach to MMPSA. This has included hosting an expert roundtable with international representation from Sweden and Germany, and targeted engagement with countries who use this medication, as recommended in the Review. A summary of the evidence available will be deposited in the House Library.

As the evidence builds, it is right we consider ways we can increase the use of MMPSA and we will continue to explore whether we might mandate this treatment in future.

As part of the Government’s efforts to crackdown on sex crimes, the Government has committed to extending Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) to twenty prisons, ramped up from the current four in the South West.

MMPSA is a pharmaceutical intervention prescribed by clinicians to individuals, based on clinical need; medication can be given in the form of testosterone suppressing medication known as anti-androgens and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs). There is evidence of serious medium and longer-term side effects and risks associated with taking anti-androgens, which need to be carefully monitored by clinicians whilst a patient is taking them.

MMPSA is most effective when used alongside psychological interventions which includes accredited offending behaviour programmes, coordinated support such as therapy and probation supervision. This integrated approach ensures that public safety is prioritised.

The evidence of outcomes related to a reduction in psychological distress is building. To strengthen our evidence base, the Government is going further than the Independent Sentencing Review recommendation by committing to extending and expanding the existing MMPSA feasibility pilot beyond the South-West region, to two additional regions, the North East and the North West, as the first steps towards a national roll-out. We are continuing to work closely with our partners across health and justice agencies to inform our plans for implementation throughout the Autumn.

Alongside the expansion of the pilot, we are working closely with experts to ensure all future decisions are based on strong evidence which prioritises public safety, including through our collaboration with Nottingham Trent University to conduct a Randomised Controlled Trial to understand the effectiveness of SSRIs in managing problematic sexual behaviours.

We are also conducting international research to inform our approach to MMPSA. This has included hosting an expert roundtable with international representation from Sweden and Germany, and targeted engagement with countries who use this medication, as recommended in the Review. A summary of the evidence available will be deposited in the House Library.

As the evidence builds, it is right we consider ways we can increase the use of MMPSA and we will continue to explore whether we might mandate this treatment in future.

As part of the Government’s efforts to crackdown on sex crimes, the Government has committed to extending Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) to twenty prisons, ramped up from the current four in the South West.

MMPSA is a pharmaceutical intervention prescribed by clinicians to individuals, based on clinical need; medication can be given in the form of testosterone suppressing medication known as anti-androgens and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs). There is evidence of serious medium and longer-term side effects and risks associated with taking anti-androgens, which need to be carefully monitored by clinicians whilst a patient is taking them.

MMPSA is most effective when used alongside psychological interventions which includes accredited offending behaviour programmes, coordinated support such as therapy and probation supervision. This integrated approach ensures that public safety is prioritised.

The evidence of outcomes related to a reduction in psychological distress is building. To strengthen our evidence base, the Government is going further than the Independent Sentencing Review recommendation by committing to extending and expanding the existing MMPSA feasibility pilot beyond the South-West region, to two additional regions, the North East and the North West, as the first steps towards a national roll-out. We are continuing to work closely with our partners across health and justice agencies to inform our plans for implementation throughout the Autumn.

Alongside the expansion of the pilot, we are working closely with experts to ensure all future decisions are based on strong evidence which prioritises public safety, including through our collaboration with Nottingham Trent University to conduct a Randomised Controlled Trial to understand the effectiveness of SSRIs in managing problematic sexual behaviours.

We are also conducting international research to inform our approach to MMPSA. This has included hosting an expert roundtable with international representation from Sweden and Germany, and targeted engagement with countries who use this medication, as recommended in the Review. A summary of the evidence available will be deposited in the House Library.

As the evidence builds, it is right we consider ways we can increase the use of MMPSA and we will continue to explore whether we might mandate this treatment in future.

As part of the Government’s efforts to crackdown on sex crimes, the Government has committed to extending Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) to twenty prisons, ramped up from the current four in the South West.

MMPSA is a pharmaceutical intervention prescribed by clinicians to individuals, based on clinical need; medication can be given in the form of testosterone suppressing medication known as anti-androgens and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitiors (SSRIs). There is evidence of serious medium and longer-term side effects and risks associated with taking anti-androgens, which need to be carefully monitored by clinicians whilst a patient is taking them.

MMPSA is most effective when used alongside psychological interventions which includes accredited offending behaviour programmes, coordinated support such as therapy and probation supervision. This integrated approach ensures that public safety is prioritised.

The evidence of outcomes related to a reduction in psychological distress is building. To strengthen our evidence base, the Government is going further than the Independent Sentencing Review recommendation by committing to extending and expanding the existing MMPSA feasibility pilot beyond the South-West region, to two additional regions, the North East and the North West, as the first steps towards a national roll-out. We are continuing to work closely with our partners across health and justice agencies to inform our plans for implementation throughout the Autumn.

Alongside the expansion of the pilot, we are working closely with experts to ensure all future decisions are based on strong evidence which prioritises public safety, including through our collaboration with Nottingham Trent University to conduct a Randomised Controlled Trial to understand the effectiveness of SSRIs in managing problematic sexual behaviours.

We are also conducting international research to inform our approach to MMPSA. This has included hosting an expert roundtable with international representation from Sweden and Germany, and targeted engagement with countries who use this medication, as recommended in the Review. A summary of the evidence available will be deposited in the House Library.

As the evidence builds, it is right we consider ways we can increase the use of MMPSA and we will continue to explore whether we might mandate this treatment in future.

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) remains committed to improving prison officer training and will be implementing the recommendations from the Independent Review of Prison Officer Training.

The Department has made progress in relation to recommendations of the Independent Review, including reviewing and improving uniform policy and leveraging technology to support and recognise learner performance, whilst also looking at opportunities to improve prison learning facilities. Furthermore, efforts are underway to automate onboarding processes for new prison officers using new technologies.

Meanwhile, the Enable Programme in HMPPS is leading a full redesign of prison officer training, aiming to strengthen the training offer through more robust, evidence-based approach. The new 12-month model will support the development of the knowledge, skills, behaviours and confidence needed for the modern prison officer role.

Over three years ago, Amy Rees CB was appointed Director General CEO of HIs Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS); Phil Copple CB was appointed Director General of Operations; and Michelle Jarman-Howe CBE was appointed Chief Operating Officer for Prisons. In April 2025, Amy Rees was temporarily appointed to the role of interim Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice while a selection process for the Permanent Secretary post took place.

This necessitated a number of consequential interim appointments, on a temporary basis, in HMPPS. Phil Copple was identified through succession planning to be the interim CEO; the Chief Operating Officer for Prisons, Michelle Jarman-Howe, was identified to be the interim Director General of Operations; and the Area Executive Director for London, Sarah Coccia, was identified to be the interim Chief Operating Officer for Prisons.

In September 2025, following the appointment of a new Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Justice, Amy Rees left the Department to take up the post of Chief Executive of Homes England. The Senior Leadership Committee (SLC), a cross-Government governance board led by the Cabinet Office responsible for approving senior appointments, confirmed James McEwen, Director General and Chief Operating Officer at the Ministry of Justice, as the permanent successor to the HMPPS CEO role in a managed move. He will formally take up the post in October 2025.

Following Daniel Khalife’s escape from HMP Wandsworth in September 2023, Keith Bristow QPM was appointed to conduct an independent investigation. The investigation was asked to identify shortcomings and ensure lessons are learned to help prevent incidents of this nature occurring again in future. Following the conclusion of the criminal proceedings earlier this year, we are considering carefully what information from Mr Bristow’s report, which relates to matters of prison security, can be appropriately shared.

The Government recognises the fundamental importance of the rule against double jeopardy, as well as the need, in exceptional cases, to correct serious miscarriages of justice. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 permits a retrial only in cases involving the most serious offences, and only where new and compelling evidence becomes available. Such retrials require an application from the Director of Public Prosecutions and approval from the Court of Appeal, ensuring that any retrial serves the interests of justice. This framework is used very rarely and is designed to maintain an appropriate balance between the principles of finality and fairness. The Government keeps the law under review but has no current plans to lower or otherwise revise this high threshold.

This Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog from the Conservative administration. We are committed to creating a more stable and sustainable criminal justice system, in which victims and the public can have confidence. That is why we took immediate action, funding a record-high allocation of 110,000 Crown Court sitting days this financial year. We will invest up to £92 million more a year in criminal legal aid solicitors and have already boosted Magistrates’ sentencing powers from 6 to 12 months. However, the backlog has reached such an extent that reducing the backlog to a sustainable level will take a considerable period of time. Fundamental reform is necessary. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose once-in-a-generation reform that will improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Part one of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts has now been published. We are considering Sir Brian’s proposals and will publish a government response in due course, then introduce legislation when parliamentary time allows. Part two of the Review, considering how the criminal courts can operate as efficiently as possible, is expected to be finalised later this year.

The table attached provides details of prison visits undertaken by the Director General Chief Executive (DGCEO), the Director General of Operations (DGOps) and the Chief Operating Officer for Prisons (COO Prisons) of HM Prison & Probation Service during the past 12 months.

Appointments to critical Director General or Senior Civil Service Pay Band 3 roles are overseen by the Senior Leadership Committee (SLC), a cross-Government governance board led by the Cabinet Office. The SLC is responsible for approving how these senior roles are filled, ensuring consistency and rigour across Departments. The previous Director General Chief Executive of His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), Amy Rees CB, was temporarily appointed to the role of interim Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice in April 2025, while a selection process for the Permanent Secretary post took place. Phil Copple CB, the appointed Director General of Operations at HMPPS, was identified through succession planning as the interim CEO of HMPPS, and his temporary appointment was subsequently confirmed by the SLC. In September 2025, Amy Rees moved to a new role as Chief Executive of Homes England. Following SLC approval, on 18 September 2025, James McEwen, Director General and Chief Operating Officer at the Ministry of Justice, was confirmed as the permanent successor to the HMPPS CEO role in a managed move. He will formally take up the post in October 2025.

The Ministry of Justice engaged with organisations representing deaf people, including the British Deaf Association, when developing and implementing new measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, to support jurors who require the support of BSL interpreters in the deliberation room. We continue to collect feedback from jurors and courts to improve and refine our processes and share best practice.

The Department is committed to taking every possible measure to strengthen prison security.

The Security Investment Programme was a £100 million investment to strengthen prison security. It was aimed at reducing crime in prisons, including the smuggling of illicit items such as drugs and other contraband.

Airport-style Enhanced Gate Security, comprising of metal detectors and X-ray baggage scanners, is used to search staff and visitors as they enter the prison. It is in use in 54 high-risk prison sites (both private and public sector), including all of the High Security prisons in the Long-Term High Security Estate. The Security Investment Programme funded Enhanced Gate Security to 42 of the total 54 high-risk prisons that have these physical countermeasures.

The following prisons have operational Enhanced Gate Security:

We are working hard to deter, detect and disrupt the use of illegal drones that deliver contraband, in order to create a safe and stable rehabilitative environment in our prisons. Our approach is multi-faceted and includes legislative measures and physical security countermeasures, as well as work across Government and with international partners.

As part of this work, we conduct drone vulnerability assessments across the prison estate to understand and mitigate risk. For operational security reasons, we cannot disclose further details surrounding these assessments.

In June, the Government announced that protective body armour would be issued to frontline prison officers working in the highest risk areas of the prison estate. Delivery of this equipment began in September and is expected to be completed by the end of the month. This initiative is part of our wider commitment to enhancing safety and security across the prison estate, ensuring staff are properly equipped to carry out their duties in demanding environments.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 placed the right to British Sign Language (BSL) interpreting in the jury deliberation room on a statutory footing (now section 9C of the Juries Act 1974). The Ministry of Justice is committed to ensuring the justice system is supported by a range of high-quality language services that meet the needs of all those that require them. Visual and tactile provisions, including sign language interpreters, are met and monitored through the Ministry of Justice's language services contract with Clarion Interpreting Ltd.

Whilst HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not record protected characteristics of jurors in respect of complaints, an interrogation of data held suggests that there have been two recorded complaints regarding interpreter provision for jury service support in the last five years. When concerns are raised, HMCTS addresses them at a local level and, where appropriate, escalates issues through established contract management processes and ongoing improvements in data quality and governance.

The quality of interpreting provided to the Department, including the management of its register of interpreters, is assured by an independent provider, The Language Shop (TLS). TLS undertakes a programme of assessments for interpreters, as well as an annual audit of supplier processes for onboarding new interpreters. These safeguards ensure the legal right is delivered in practice while maintaining the integrity of the jury room.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 placed the right to British Sign Language (BSL) interpreting in the jury deliberation room on a statutory footing (now section 9C of the Juries Act 1974). The Ministry of Justice is committed to ensuring the justice system is supported by a range of high-quality language services that meet the needs of all those that require them. Visual and tactile provisions, including sign language interpreters, are met and monitored through the Ministry of Justice's language services contract with Clarion Interpreting Ltd.

Whilst HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not record protected characteristics of jurors in respect of complaints, an interrogation of data held suggests that there have been two recorded complaints regarding interpreter provision for jury service support in the last five years. When concerns are raised, HMCTS addresses them at a local level and, where appropriate, escalates issues through established contract management processes and ongoing improvements in data quality and governance.

The quality of interpreting provided to the Department, including the management of its register of interpreters, is assured by an independent provider, The Language Shop (TLS). TLS undertakes a programme of assessments for interpreters, as well as an annual audit of supplier processes for onboarding new interpreters. These safeguards ensure the legal right is delivered in practice while maintaining the integrity of the jury room.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 placed the right to British Sign Language (BSL) interpreting in the jury deliberation room on a statutory footing (now section 9C of the Juries Act 1974). The Ministry of Justice is committed to ensuring the justice system is supported by a range of high-quality language services that meet the needs of all those that require them. Visual and tactile provisions, including sign language interpreters, are met and monitored through the Ministry of Justice's language services contract with Clarion Interpreting Ltd.

Whilst HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not record protected characteristics of jurors in respect of complaints, an interrogation of data held suggests that there have been two recorded complaints regarding interpreter provision for jury service support in the last five years. When concerns are raised, HMCTS addresses them at a local level and, where appropriate, escalates issues through established contract management processes and ongoing improvements in data quality and governance.

The quality of interpreting provided to the Department, including the management of its register of interpreters, is assured by an independent provider, The Language Shop (TLS). TLS undertakes a programme of assessments for interpreters, as well as an annual audit of supplier processes for onboarding new interpreters. These safeguards ensure the legal right is delivered in practice while maintaining the integrity of the jury room.

Since the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act came into force in 2022, there have been 84 bookings made for BSL interpreters to assist a deaf juror in deliberations.

HMCTS collects a range of information to support the administration of jury service and to fulfil its Public Sector Equality Duty, and this is regularly reviewed to ensure it is robust and proportionate. Information on adjustments made for individual jurors is not held centrally.

Since the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act came into force in 2022, there have been 84 bookings made for BSL interpreters to assist a deaf juror in deliberations.

HMCTS collects a range of information to support the administration of jury service and to fulfil its Public Sector Equality Duty, and this is regularly reviewed to ensure it is robust and proportionate. Information on adjustments made for individual jurors is not held centrally.

The Government is committed to opening up jury service to as many eligible people as possible and ensuring disability is never a barrier. No juror is expected to meet the cost of interpreting. HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) arranges and funds British Sign Language interpreting for jurors throughout their service, including during deliberations, via national language service contracts.

Jurors may also claim loss of earnings and other allowances under existing regulations, so cost should not prevent eligible deaf people from serving. HMCTS keeps operational procedures under review with the judiciary to ensure provision is timely and effective and that eligible jurors are not excluded from panels on cost grounds.

The Government is committed to opening up jury service to as many eligible people as possible and ensuring disability is never a barrier. No juror is expected to meet the cost of interpreting. HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) arranges and funds British Sign Language interpreting for jurors throughout their service, including during deliberations, via national language service contracts.

Jurors may also claim loss of earnings and other allowances under existing regulations, so cost should not prevent eligible deaf people from serving. HMCTS keeps operational procedures under review with the judiciary to ensure provision is timely and effective and that eligible jurors are not excluded from panels on cost grounds.

The Government is committed to ensuring that all jurors are able to participate effectively in the Criminal Justice System. Since new legislative provisions came into force in 2022, deaf jurors may be granted the assistance of British Sign Language (BSL) interpreters in the jury deliberation room. If an interpreter is unavailable at any point, it is for the trial judge to decide whether to proceed or to adjourn until appropriate support is in place. Courts source interpreters through the Ministry of Justice’s contracted suppliers, with contingency arrangements (including booking pairs of BSL interpreters for deliberations) to manage fatigue and ensure quality.

HMCTS guidance makes clear that reasonable adjustments must be put in place to enable jurors with disabilities to participate, and that interpreter support should be arranged promptly where required. Where an interpreter is temporarily unavailable, jury officers and the judge will consider appropriate interim steps, such as written communication, assistive listening technology, or a brief adjournment, so that the juror is not disadvantaged. Judicial guidance in the Equal Treatment Bench Book underlines that arrangements are judicially led in line with legislation.

The Government is committed to ensuring that all jurors are able to participate effectively in the Criminal Justice System. Since new legislative provisions came into force in 2022, deaf jurors may be granted the assistance of British Sign Language (BSL) interpreters in the jury deliberation room. If an interpreter is unavailable at any point, it is for the trial judge to decide whether to proceed or to adjourn until appropriate support is in place. Courts source interpreters through the Ministry of Justice’s contracted suppliers, with contingency arrangements (including booking pairs of BSL interpreters for deliberations) to manage fatigue and ensure quality.

HMCTS guidance makes clear that reasonable adjustments must be put in place to enable jurors with disabilities to participate, and that interpreter support should be arranged promptly where required. Where an interpreter is temporarily unavailable, jury officers and the judge will consider appropriate interim steps, such as written communication, assistive listening technology, or a brief adjournment, so that the juror is not disadvantaged. Judicial guidance in the Equal Treatment Bench Book underlines that arrangements are judicially led in line with legislation.

The Ministry of Justice has set national minimum standards for British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter provision across courts through the Language Services Contract. All interpreters must be registered with a voluntary National Regulator for Language Service professionals, with the minimum qualification standard for court work being a Level 6 BSL qualification.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) provides staff with mandatory training and comprehensive guidance to support awareness and application of the principles of both the Equality Act 2010 and the Children Act 1989.

This includes digital learning on reasonable adjustments, safeguarding policy and private and public law proceedings, supported by standard operating procedures, job cards, and Equality Impact Assessments.

HMCTS also promotes inclusive practice with internal working groups and by evaluating how the principles of both Acts are followed. This includes regular reporting on activity and pilot programmes such as the Family Court Pathfinder which aims to improve outcomes for children and families.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

Given the important and sensitive work undertaken across the civil, family and tribunal jurisdictions, and the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal in particular, it is entirely understandable that there will be concern at reports of an IT bug. It is important to reaffirm the Ministry of Justice’s commitment to a fair, open, and transparent justice system. Public trust in our courts is paramount, and any suggestion that this trust may have been compromised is taken extremely seriously.

There is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. However, actions are underway by HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the technical error has not resulted in adverse outcomes or materially influenced judicial decisions. Recognising the importance of the effective running of HMCTS’s digital case managements systems, a technical fix was applied as a priority within the relevant jurisdictions with the final fix applied in January 2025.

In 2023, under the previous Government, HMCTS identified that a technical issue in the Civil, Family and Tribunals case management system was having an impact on some services because of the way that services were interacting with the Core Case Data (CCD) database. This technical issue had the potential to cause some documents and data fields to be hidden from view in certain cases across Civil, Family, and Tribunal jurisdictions.

Following a risk-based assessment, HMCTS initially undertook targeted investigations, which have since been significantly expanded. In Tribunals, the area affected was SSCS cases. In recent weeks, HMCTS has carried out additional work which has continued to assure that the technical issue was indeed of very low incidence and confirmed that there is no evidence of any impact on case outcomes to date. Further assurance work is ongoing.

In Civil and Family jurisdictions, no impact on judicial decisions has been identified to date. In Family Public Law, operational mitigations – such as local authorities supplying full bundles directly to the court – reduce the risk of missing documents on the CCD system affecting case outcomes.

Due to the sensitivity of these matters, further re-assurance work is still under way. Any further steps will be determined and communicated to parties should this work identify any cases of concern.

HMCTS follows established escalation protocols to ensure that technical issues are assessed and, where appropriate, disclosed to judges and legal professionals. In light of this episode, Ministers have asked that these processes are strengthened, including improvements to incident management and governance structures to update the risk assessment criteria on which HMCTS considers communication about technical problems to relevant affected partners or users, and strengthening the systematic handling of cross-cutting or architectural risks.

HMCTS staff can raise concerns through internal whistleblowing channels, which are managed independently and in line with departmental policy. All concerns are investigated and escalated appropriately.

The internal report referenced in media coverage was part of a whistleblowing investigation conducted in line with Ministry of Justice policies. In line with standard practice, we do not publish internal HR and whistleblowing reports. Likewise, it would not be appropriate to comment on questions about specific internal disciplinary investigations, other than to confirm that departmental policy and process are followed as required.

There are no plans to pause court digitisation. While technical challenges are an inevitable part of digital transformation, they are investigated and triaged according to risk. We are continuing to digitise and improve our services to support swift access to justice.

Over the span of the HMCTS Reform Programme there will have been many organisations involved in the development of the HMCTS case management systems, of which there are several. Major delivery partners are listed in Reform Programme documentation and procurement records, which are publicly available. The main suppliers which have worked on the development of the Civil, Family and Tribunals Platform (that includes Core Case Data) during the period of 2016 to present are:

• Atos

• Capgemini

• CGI

• Cognizant

• Methods

• PA Consulting

• Scrumconnect

• Transform UK

• Solirius Consulting

• Version 1

This includes the provision of any services in the development of the case management system, such as: development, quality assurance testing, architecture, user-centred design, data architecture, delivery management amongst others.

The Law Commission’s 2024 scoping report on financial remedies on divorce considered whether the current law provides a cohesive framework in which divorcing couples can expect fair and sufficiently certain outcomes. The report also highlighted a number of possible models for reform, noting the potential benefits and challenges of each. The Government is carefully considering the report’s findings, including the possible models identified, and will provide a response in due course.

We publish prison establishment level indicative vacancies in the HMPPS Workforce stats, table 4 of the Prison and Probation Officer Recruitment annex: HM Prison and Probation Service workforce quarterly: June 2025 - GOV.UK.

East Midlands and Lincolnshire data as below (further information and Notes explanation can be found at the above link).

We know that sufficient and skilled frontline staffing is fundamental to delivering safe, secure, and rehabilitative prisons. We remain committed to ensuring prisons are sufficiently resourced and that we retain and build levels of experience.

HMPPS believes that having a high-quality training offer for prison officers ensures that they feel competent in their roles, and that they can do their vital job of reducing reoffending and protecting the public. All new entrants are expected to undergo 10 weeks of initial training, comprised of an induction process that aims to familiarise them with the prison environment by meeting their line manager and colleagues and learning about security procedures. This is followed by face-to-face training at a central or local learning venue of 7 weeks for staff going into the adult male estate, 8 weeks for staff going into the female estate or 9 weeks for those going into the Youth Custody Service. They then return to their establishment for a final week of consolidation and shadowing.

HMPPS is committed to improving prison officer training. Through the ‘Enable Programme’, a dedicated workforce transformation programme, HMPPS is leading a full redesign of prison officer training, aiming to strengthen the training offer through more robust, evidence-based approach. This will include a new 12-month modular package of learning which will support the development of the knowledge, skills, behaviours and confidence needed for the modern prison officer role.

Substantive recruitment efforts will continue at all prisons where vacancies exist or are projected, with targeted interventions applied to those prisons with the most need. We closely monitor staffing levels across the estate and look to provide short-term support where needed. All prison expansion projects, whether new prisons or smaller builds, are factored into our staffing forecasts to ensure we recruit on time and build up the experience needed to continue to deliver safe and secure regimes.

The Department does not publish a ‘retention rate’ for prison officers. The quarterly HMPPS workforce statistics includes resignation rates for prison officers, which refers to the percentage of staff with a permanent contract of employment who resigned from HMPPS, and leaving rates, which refers to the percentage of staff with a permanent contract of employment who left HMPPS, including individuals who have retired early, but excluding staff who left due to voluntary early departure schemes and redundancy.

The latest data in the quarterly HMPPS workforce statistics covers the period up to the end of June 2025 and are available here: HM Prison and Probation Service workforce quarterly: June 2025 - GOV.UK.

We remain committed to ensuring prisons are sufficiently resourced and that we retain levels of experience, both of which are fundamental to delivering quality outcomes in prisons. To help increase retention, HMPPS has created a retention strategy which is linked to wider activities around employee experience, employee lifecycle and staff engagement at work. Alongside the strategy, a retention toolkit has been introduced which identifies local, regional and national interventions against the drivers of attrition, which are utilised by establishments to ensure that they are embedding individual Retention Plans.