Asked by: Noah Law (Labour - St Austell and Newquay)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what support the Government is giving to families in the Family Court who have suffered abuse by non-resident parents.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to ensuring that victims of domestic abuse, including children, are properly supported in the Family Courts. This is regardless of whether the abusive parent is resident or non-resident at the time of the case.
Family Courts have a range of tools available to support and protect victims of domestic abuse. The court must assume that the ability of victims of domestic abuse to participate in family proceedings is diminished by vulnerability, and as such can make special measures available to support them in court. Special measures are designed to ensure victims are fully supported throughout proceedings and can include giving evidence by video link or from behind a screen or using separate waiting areas or separate entrances and exits. Additionally, a victim of domestic abuse cannot be cross-examined by their abuser in family proceedings. The court can appoint a qualified legal representative to undertake the cross-examination
To further support victims, court procedures, set out in Practice Directions, make it clear that Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs), who provide practical, emotional or moral support, can accompany parties in proceedings.
Where Family Court proceedings would risk causing harm to parents or children the court can make an order to prevent a person from making further applications without permission of the court, such as a civil restraint order or, in relation to proceedings under the Children Act 1989, an order under section 91(14) of that Act.
Legal aid is also available for private family matters such as child arrangements, financial remedy proceedings and divorce if an individual is a victim of domestic abuse or at risk of being abused. Legal aid is also available for individuals in some private family orders, such as prohibited steps orders, if the child subject to the order is a victim of child abuse or at risk of abuse. Funding is subject to providing evidence of abuse and passing the means and merits test.
Asked by: Daisy Cooper (Liberal Democrat - St Albans)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made a recent estimate of the number of divorce hearings that have had to be (a) adjourned and (b) rescheduled as a result of delays in receiving cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) statements from (i) teachers and (ii) civil service pension administrators.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government does not hold data regarding the number of financial remedy hearings that have been adjourned as a result of delays in receiving cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) statements from teachers and civil service pension administrators.
As part of its 2024 scoping report on financial remedies, the Law Commission considered whether there was scope for reform in relation to the treatment of pensions on the division of assets on divorce. This Spring, the Government will be consulting on the challenges raised by the Law Commission in its report.
Asked by: Imran Hussain (Labour - Bradford East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the role of structured sport and physical activity in supporting rehabilitation outcomes.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We recognise that structured sport and physical activity can play an important role in supporting rehabilitation by improving physical and mental wellbeing, supporting positive behaviour, and encouraging engagement with wider rehabilitative activity.
All prisons are required to provide physical education. HMPPS promotes participation in activities supervised and organised as part of an establishment’s agreed physical education programme. While Prison Service Instruction 58/2011 Physical Education for Prisoners requires prisons to offer a range of sport and gym-based activity for a minimum of one hour per week for adults and two hours a week for children and young people, establishments are encouraged to align with the Chief Medical Officer’s recommendation of at least 150 minutes of physical activity each week. Provision is tailored across the adult and children’s secure estate. This includes developmentally appropriate physical education for children and young people delivered in partnership with the Youth Custody Service.
HMPPS works with national and community partners, including the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, to complement physical activity delivered by PE staff. These partnerships support rehabilitation by improving health and wellbeing, building skills and encouraging positive engagement in custody and on release.
In the community, the Probation Service works with a range of partners to support access to physical activity as part of a wider rehabilitative offer.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of extending courts and tribunal fees to challenging Section 13 rent increases through the First-Tier Tribunal on the number of rent increase challenges.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice keeps all fees under continuous review to ensure that His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has the resources necessary to operate fairly and efficiently, while ensuring access to justice is protected for all.
The Government has laid legislation to begin the process of implementing a new fees framework in the Property Chamber. The purpose of the new framework is to deliver a fair and sustainable Property Chamber that is accessible to all. The framework includes a fee of £47 for applications to appeal a rent increase, with no hearing fee – this is one of the lowest fees across HMCTS.
The Help with Fees scheme will always be available to provide financial support to those who cannot afford to pay fees. In 2024/25, we remitted £91 million of fees income to protect access to justice.
The changes are subject to Parliamentary consent.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government on extending court and tribunal fees to challenging Section 13 rent increases through the First-Tier Tribunal.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice keeps all fees under continuous review to ensure that His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has the resources necessary to operate fairly and efficiently, while ensuring access to justice is protected for all.
The Government has laid legislation to begin the process of implementing a new fees framework in the Property Chamber. The purpose of the new framework is to deliver a fair and sustainable Property Chamber that is accessible to all. The framework includes a fee of £47 for applications to appeal a rent increase, with no hearing fee – this is one of the lowest fees across HMCTS.
The Help with Fees scheme will always be available to provide financial support to those who cannot afford to pay fees. In 2024/25, we remitted £91 million of fees income to protect access to justice.
The changes are subject to Parliamentary consent.
Asked by: Jess Brown-Fuller (Liberal Democrat - Chichester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he will consider reopening the Magistrates Court in Chichester.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
There are currently no plans to reopen the former Chichester Magistrates’ Court.
The building has been closed since 2017 and is now in very poor condition. With the neighbouring Chichester Combined Court having transitioned from a Nightingale court to the permanent estate, HMCTS is now reviewing options for the future of the former Magistrates’ Court site, including its disposal.
Asked by: Jess Brown-Fuller (Liberal Democrat - Chichester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans he has for the Magistrates Court building in Chichester.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
There are currently no plans to reopen the former Chichester Magistrates’ Court.
The building has been closed since 2017 and is now in very poor condition. With the neighbouring Chichester Combined Court having transitioned from a Nightingale court to the permanent estate, HMCTS is now reviewing options for the future of the former Magistrates’ Court site, including its disposal.
Asked by: Jess Brown-Fuller (Liberal Democrat - Chichester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of reductions in the provision of prison education on future reoffending rates.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Ministry of Justice remains firmly committed to reducing reoffending by ensuring that prisoners can access high‑quality education, skills training and work opportunities. Rising delivery costs have impacted the level of provision that can be commissioned through the Core Education contracts, but this is one part of a much broader offer designed to support rehabilitation.
Prisoners continue to benefit from a wide range of educational opportunities, including digitally enabled in‑cell learning, locally commissioned programmes, library services, higher‑level study, vocational qualifications, apprenticeships and work in prison industries. Governors retain the flexibility to commission provision that best meets the needs of their population. We will monitor delivery and outcomes through contract management and a full evaluation of the new Prisoner Education Service.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what evidence his Department has gathered from schemes overseas comparable with the proposed Interest on Lawyers’ Client Accounts scheme.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Interest on Lawyer’s Client Account schemes have been successfully employed in several international jurisdictions for decades. As part of developing this proposal, the Ministry of Justice has undertaken extensive research and engagement with experts, officials and administrators from several international comparators. This includes schemes in Australia, Canada, France and the USA.
Asked by: James Cleverly (Conservative - Braintree)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of amending the Aarhus Convention provisions on costs in planning cases.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government remains committed to upholding its obligations under the Aarhus Convention, including maintaining access to environmental justice that is not prohibitively expensive. We set up the Environmental Costs Protection Regime (ECPR) in 2013 to enable this, and in May 2025 we committed to a series of measures to strengthen the regime. We keep all policies under review and, importantly, judges already have the power to vary the costs caps upwards or downwards, taking into account the particular circumstances of a case.
Between September and December 2024, the Government ran a Call for Evidence on access to justice in relation to the Aarhus Convention. This Call for Evidence considered the recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee regarding whether changes are required to the ECPR. The Government intends to publish a response to this Call for Evidence in due course.
Further, the Government published its response to the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce’s Review on Friday 13 March 2026. The Government recognises the concerns raised by the Taskforce regarding delays caused by a small number of unmeritorious legal challenges against nuclear developments and other major infrastructure projects, which could jeopardise our goal of reaching net zero by 2050. That is why we have accepted the Taskforce’s proposals in recommendation 20 to adjust the costs caps.
These adjustments will be undertaken with a view to prioritising genuine legal challenges, whilst supporting the Government’s growth mission by supporting us to build the necessary infrastructure essential for energy security, economic growth, and net zero. We will therefore invite the Civil Procedure Rule Committee to adjust the ECPR with this aim in mind.