Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by (i) Birmingham County Court, (ii) Birmingham High Court and (iii) Birmingham Family Court for contempt of court since November 2014.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
In order to answer 223311 Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) would have to manually check every court log from 1 May 2013 to the present at Birmingham County Court, Birmingham Family Court and the High Court at Birmingham. Birmingham County Court and Birmingham Family Court between them heard in excess of 24,000 cases, each of which would have to be manually checked for any hearings for contempt of court.
HMCTS have been able to check records of cases heard since November 2014, and identified those where committal orders were made for imprisonment for contempt of court. The contemnors weren’t all present at court and did not necessarily begin their term of imprisonment straight away. There were none at Birmingham Family Court. Details of committal orders made for imprisonment for contempt of court at Birmingham County Court and High Court since 1 November 2014 can be found in the table below. This data has been collated specifically to answer this question and has not been checked to the standard of Official Statistics.
Court | Judge | Date | Period |
Birmingham High Court | HHJ Purle QC | 13-2-15 | 6 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Rich TD | 7-11-14 | 8 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 19-11-14 | 16 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 15-1-15 | 18 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 15-1-15 | 25 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Ingram | 30-1-15 | 24 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Shorthose | 13-2-15 | 26 weeks |
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by the High Court to the Prison Service for contempt of court since November 2014.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
Details of contempt of court hearings are not held on Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) case management systems, and HMCTS do not centrally collate data on contempt of court cases. Contempt of court can cover a wide variety of circumstances and can be committed by a party in a case or by someone unconnected with specific proceedings such as a juror or a member of the press. Those relating to a specific case will be noted on the court log or daily list and the warrant retained on file. Those not relating to specific cases will be recorded on daily lists and warrants stored along with other orders.
The High Court in London has been able to check its records since November 2014 and have imprisoned two people for contempt of court, both of which were heard in open court. The details are provided in the table below:
Division | Judge | Date | Period |
Queens Bench | HHJ Seymour | 20-11-14 | 3 Months |
Chancery | Justice Asplin | 2-2-15 | 3 Months |
However, in order to identify any cases where a contempt of court occurred in the courts in Birmingham HMCTS would have to manually check every court file at each court for the relevant period. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Whilst prisons log the offence for which prisoners are sent to prison, they do not record the details that have been requested. In order to obtain the requested information, the individual records of all prisoners currently held in prisons, together with those that have been discharged during the period requested, would need to be located and individually checked. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by (i) Birmingham County Court, (ii) Birmingham High Court and (iii) Birmingham Family Court for contempt of court since May 2013.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
Details of contempt of court hearings are not held on Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) case management systems, and HMCTS do not centrally collate data on contempt of court cases. Contempt of court can cover a wide variety of circumstances and can be committed by a party in a case or by someone unconnected with specific proceedings such as a juror or a member of the press. Those relating to a specific case will be noted on the court log or daily list and the warrant retained on file. Those not relating to specific cases will be recorded on daily lists and warrants stored along with other orders.
The High Court in London has been able to check its records since November 2014 and have imprisoned two people for contempt of court, both of which were heard in open court. The details are provided in the table below:
Division | Judge | Date | Period |
Queens Bench | HHJ Seymour | 20-11-14 | 3 Months |
Chancery | Justice Asplin | 2-2-15 | 3 Months |
However, in order to identify any cases where a contempt of court occurred in the courts in Birmingham HMCTS would have to manually check every court file at each court for the relevant period. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Whilst prisons log the offence for which prisoners are sent to prison, they do not record the details that have been requested. In order to obtain the requested information, the individual records of all prisoners currently held in prisons, together with those that have been discharged during the period requested, would need to be located and individually checked. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the contribution by the hon. Member for North West Cambridgeshire of 18 March 2014, Official Report, column 625, what progress has been made by his Department's investigation into reasons for increases in the number of non-molestation orders issued by the English courts.
Answered by Mike Penning
Non-molestation orders are an important form of protection for those suffering or at risk of domestic violence. Legal aid funds applications, regardless of the applicant’s means. We accept current orders, or those made in the previous 24 months as the evidence required to access legal aid in private family law matters.
The MoJ keeps the impacts of legal aid reforms under review. While it is true that the number of non-molestation orders applied for through the courts has increased since implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, published data does not support the position that this is due to such orders being a form of acceptable evidence of domestic violence required to access legal aid funding in private family law child or finance arrangement matters. We are confident that the court procedures for making non-molestation orders are sufficiently robust.
The Ministry of Justice has commissioned an extensive research programme to investigate individual behavioural responses following the legal aid reforms. This will provide robust findings on the prevalence of social and civil justice problems and the ways in which people resolve these problems both within and outside of the justice system. Findings from this programme are expected in Autumn 2015.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to take steps to implement the recommendation contained in paragraph 48, subsection iv of 2014 EWCA Civ 1477.
Answered by Simon Hughes
We have been clear that there needs to be more openness in the Family Courts and are grateful to the President of the Family Division for his ongoing work on this issue. On contempt, the Guidance issued in 2013 by the Lord Chief Justice and President of the Family Division made clear that contempt decisions must be announced in public. Where a hearing for committal is exceptionally held in private, the judge must set out the reasons for doing so in public. Judgments are posted on the British and Irish Legal Information Institute’s website. Information on the courts who commit people to prison for contempt is already collected and recorded where supplied, and this guidance will result in greater consistency in the information which can be collected. The Ministry of Justice does not hold information on cases of imprisonment for contempt of court where there has been no published judgment on BAILII. BAILII is not a Government publication.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in how many cases of imprisonment for contempt of court in January 2014 there has been no published judgment on Bailii.
Answered by Simon Hughes
We have been clear that there needs to be more openness in the Family Courts and are grateful to the President of the Family Division for his ongoing work on this issue. On contempt, the Guidance issued in 2013 by the Lord Chief Justice and President of the Family Division made clear that contempt decisions must be announced in public. Where a hearing for committal is exceptionally held in private, the judge must set out the reasons for doing so in public. Judgments are posted on the British and Irish Legal Information Institute’s website. Information on the courts who commit people to prison for contempt is already collected and recorded where supplied, and this guidance will result in greater consistency in the information which can be collected. The Ministry of Justice does not hold information on cases of imprisonment for contempt of court where there has been no published judgment on BAILII. BAILII is not a Government publication.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people were imprisoned for contempt of court before each division of the legal system in each month since May 2013.
Answered by Mike Penning
The table below sets out the number of people who were received into custody for contempt of court between May 2013 and March 2014 (the latest available figures). Contempt of court covers a wide variety of conduct which undermines or has the potential to undermine the course of justice.
Receptions into prison (1) for contempt of court, May 2013-March 2014, England and Wales
May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13
Contempt of Court 11 8 13 14 7 12
Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14
7 6 8 7 8
(1) This excludes imprisonment in court cells and police cells
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.