To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Solicitors: Disciplinary Proceedings
Monday 20th July 2020

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government which solicitors were (1) fined, (2) struck off, and (3) received other disciplinary action from the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, for charging coalminers out of the compensation scheme for (a) vibration white finger, and (b) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. [T]

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

The Government does not hold the information requested. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal is an independent Tribunal established under the Solicitors Act 1974.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Monday 16th July 2018

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent steps he is taking to reduce waiting times for personal independence payment tribunals.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

Latest figures indicate that since Personal Independent Payment was introduced, more than 3.1 million decisions have been made, and of these 4% have been overturned.

In order to respond to a general increase in appeal receipts, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has been working with the Tribunal’s judiciary both to appoint additional judges and panel members, and to take forward initiatives with the potential to increase the capacity and performance of the Tribunal. We have recruited extra fee-paid judicial office holders: 250 judges across the First-tier Tribunal, 125 disability-qualified members, and up to 230 medical members. We are also developing a new digital system which enables speedier processing of appeals and a better service for all parties to the proceedings. In addition, we are reviewing with the Judiciary, current listing practices to increase the number of cases listed on a Tribunal session, and introducing case-management “triage” sessions, with the aim of reducing the time taken for appeals to reach final determination. All these measures will increase the capacity of the Tribunal, with the aim of reducing waiting times for appellants.

HMCTS is very sensitive to the needs of people with a wide range of physical and mental challenges, including waiting times for Tribunal hearings. Tribunal staff, and judicial office holders, are trained accordingly, with the HMCTS reasonable adjustments policy and practice applied where appropriate. Guidance on the HMCTS reasonable adjustments policy is published on GOV.UK.

If an expedited hearing is sought, or if the Tribunal identifies a case which may benefit from an expedited hearing, a judge (or caseworker acting under delegated powers and then within 14 days subject to an automatic right to be placed before a judge) will make a case management decision on the issue taking into account all the circumstances known about the case. Such decisions may be revised on application and are subject to appeal if an error of law is made.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Monday 16th July 2018

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the effects of waiting times for PIP tribunals on vulnerable people.

Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

Latest figures indicate that since Personal Independent Payment was introduced, more than 3.1 million decisions have been made, and of these 4% have been overturned.

In order to respond to a general increase in appeal receipts, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has been working with the Tribunal’s judiciary both to appoint additional judges and panel members, and to take forward initiatives with the potential to increase the capacity and performance of the Tribunal. We have recruited extra fee-paid judicial office holders: 250 judges across the First-tier Tribunal, 125 disability-qualified members, and up to 230 medical members. We are also developing a new digital system which enables speedier processing of appeals and a better service for all parties to the proceedings. In addition, we are reviewing with the Judiciary, current listing practices to increase the number of cases listed on a Tribunal session, and introducing case-management “triage” sessions, with the aim of reducing the time taken for appeals to reach final determination. All these measures will increase the capacity of the Tribunal, with the aim of reducing waiting times for appellants.

HMCTS is very sensitive to the needs of people with a wide range of physical and mental challenges, including waiting times for Tribunal hearings. Tribunal staff, and judicial office holders, are trained accordingly, with the HMCTS reasonable adjustments policy and practice applied where appropriate. Guidance on the HMCTS reasonable adjustments policy is published on GOV.UK.

If an expedited hearing is sought, or if the Tribunal identifies a case which may benefit from an expedited hearing, a judge (or caseworker acting under delegated powers and then within 14 days subject to an automatic right to be placed before a judge) will make a case management decision on the issue taking into account all the circumstances known about the case. Such decisions may be revised on application and are subject to appeal if an error of law is made.


Written Question
Carillion
Tuesday 23rd January 2018

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department has taken to provide for the continuity of services supplied by Carillion plc to prisons.

Answered by Rory Stewart

Carillion continues to deliver their prison facilities management contracts and the Commercial and Contract Management Directorate continue to work closely with them. We are discussing future arrangements with the appointed Official Receiver.


Written Question
Juries: Mental Health
Friday 1st December 2017

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether members of the public who do jury service in sensitive or difficult cases are warned about the nature of the evidence before the case takes place.

Answered by Dominic Raab

There is a range of guidance material available to jurors. The Juror Charter sets out the minimum standards that a juror can expect from HM Courts & Tribunals Service at each stage of their jury service, including when jurors may be experiencing distress. It is available online and in courts. A leaflet entitled ‘Supporting You Through Jury Service’, which offers further advice to jurors, is also available in courts and on-line.

If a juror has any concerns, including when the type of case is initially disclosed, they may state these to the Usher or Jury Officer. Jurors can also write a note which sets out their concerns, which will be passed to the trial judge. The judge will discuss with Counsel and decide whether to discharge the juror from the trial.

Jurors are encouraged to speak to their GP and/or the Samaritans if any aspect of their jury service has left them feeling distressed. Their GP can help them to access counselling services and the Samaritans can provide support over the telephone, email or through a local Samaritans branch.

The judiciary are responsible for engaging with the jury on the nature of the evidence in sensitive or difficult cases. The trial judge will seek to meet the interests of justice without causing undue anxiety to any juror and may therefore take an independent decision to warn the jury of likely distressing evidence. The trial judge also has the discretion, in appropriate circumstances, to dismiss any juror who may find the evidence too distressing to continue.


Written Question
Juries: Mental Health
Friday 1st December 2017

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what support is available to individuals who do jury service in sensitive cases.

Answered by Dominic Raab

There is a range of guidance material available to jurors. The Juror Charter sets out the minimum standards that a juror can expect from HM Courts & Tribunals Service at each stage of their jury service, including when jurors may be experiencing distress. It is available online and in courts. A leaflet entitled ‘Supporting You Through Jury Service’, which offers further advice to jurors, is also available in courts and on-line.

If a juror has any concerns, including when the type of case is initially disclosed, they may state these to the Usher or Jury Officer. Jurors can also write a note which sets out their concerns, which will be passed to the trial judge. The judge will discuss with Counsel and decide whether to discharge the juror from the trial.

Jurors are encouraged to speak to their GP and/or the Samaritans if any aspect of their jury service has left them feeling distressed. Their GP can help them to access counselling services and the Samaritans can provide support over the telephone, email or through a local Samaritans branch.

The judiciary are responsible for engaging with the jury on the nature of the evidence in sensitive or difficult cases. The trial judge will seek to meet the interests of justice without causing undue anxiety to any juror and may therefore take an independent decision to warn the jury of likely distressing evidence. The trial judge also has the discretion, in appropriate circumstances, to dismiss any juror who may find the evidence too distressing to continue.


Written Question
Juries: Mental Health
Friday 1st December 2017

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether an individual can opt out of jury service if the case includes sensitive or traumatic details that may affect their mental health.

Answered by Dominic Raab

There is a range of guidance material available to jurors. The Juror Charter sets out the minimum standards that a juror can expect from HM Courts & Tribunals Service at each stage of their jury service, including when jurors may be experiencing distress. It is available online and in courts. A leaflet entitled ‘Supporting You Through Jury Service’, which offers further advice to jurors, is also available in courts and on-line.

If a juror has any concerns, including when the type of case is initially disclosed, they may state these to the Usher or Jury Officer. Jurors can also write a note which sets out their concerns, which will be passed to the trial judge. The judge will discuss with Counsel and decide whether to discharge the juror from the trial.

Jurors are encouraged to speak to their GP and/or the Samaritans if any aspect of their jury service has left them feeling distressed. Their GP can help them to access counselling services and the Samaritans can provide support over the telephone, email or through a local Samaritans branch.

The judiciary are responsible for engaging with the jury on the nature of the evidence in sensitive or difficult cases. The trial judge will seek to meet the interests of justice without causing undue anxiety to any juror and may therefore take an independent decision to warn the jury of likely distressing evidence. The trial judge also has the discretion, in appropriate circumstances, to dismiss any juror who may find the evidence too distressing to continue.


Written Question
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
Friday 30th June 2017

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the Government's policy is on UK engagement with the Fundamental Rights Agency after the UK leaves the EU.

Answered by Sam Gyimah

Our relationship with the European Union's agencies upon exit will be evaluated in light of delivering the twelve objectives outlined by the Prime Minister to achieve a deep and special partnership between the UK and the EU.

No decisions have yet been made on our future relationship with the EU's agencies after leaving the EU. We are considering very carefully a range of options.

As the Prime Minister has made clear the UK will continue to exercise its rights and fulfil its obligations as a member of the EU until our exit. This includes participation in the work of the Fundamental Rights Agency.


Written Question
Antisemitism
Tuesday 25th April 2017

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many meetings she has had with which organisations to discuss issues related to anti-Semitism since 2015.

Answered by Phillip Lee

The Secretary of State for Justice has not met with any organisations to discuss issues related to anti-Semitism since 2015.

Details of Ministers' meetings with external organisations are published routinely on Gov.uk and can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/moj-gifts-hospitality-travel-and-meetings.


Written Question
Judges: Security
Friday 18th November 2016

Asked by: Lord Mann (Non-affiliated - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many judges have had publicly-funded security improvements made to their homes for personal safety reasons in the last five years.

Answered by Oliver Heald

Any threats to the judiciary are taken extremely seriously and significant threats are reported to the police. HMCTS and the police work closely together to ensure that effective risk assessments are undertaken if a judge is at significant risk of harm and proportionate steps are taken to mitigate any risk. The level of threat may result in the Police completing a security risk assessment of the judicial office holder’s home, which will result in the provision of security advice and support.