Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps are being taken to ensure that support provided to children involved in family court cases is (a) child-centred and (b) informed by their lived experience of domestic abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the significant impact of domestic abuse on children and adult victims involved in family court proceedings, which is why we are committed to reforms that improve multi-agency working and provide better support.
Central to these reforms is the expansion of the Pathfinder model which seeks to improve outcomes for children and families involved in private family law proceedings, including those who have experienced domestic abuse. The voice of the child is amplified through a Child Impact Report which assesses the child’s experiences and needs, ensuring these are heard and communicated to the court.
Under the Pathfinder model, victims of domestic abuse are also offered specialist support from an Independent Domestic Violence Adviser. The model currently operates in 10 court areas, backed by £13 million investment in the current financial year.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment has been made of the adequacy of funding available to support victims of domestic abuse and their children while engaged in family court proceedings.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the significant impact of domestic abuse on children and adult victims involved in family court proceedings, which is why we are committed to reforms that improve multi-agency working and provide better support.
Central to these reforms is the expansion of the Pathfinder model which seeks to improve outcomes for children and families involved in private family law proceedings, including those who have experienced domestic abuse. The voice of the child is amplified through a Child Impact Report which assesses the child’s experiences and needs, ensuring these are heard and communicated to the court.
Under the Pathfinder model, victims of domestic abuse are also offered specialist support from an Independent Domestic Violence Adviser. The model currently operates in 10 court areas, backed by £13 million investment in the current financial year.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps are being taken to help ensure that family court procedures prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour following relationship breakdown.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the psychological impact of contact arrangements on children is considered in cases involving domestic abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether recommendations arising from the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s 2025 report will inform the handling of domestic abuse cases within the family justice system.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Daisy Cooper (Liberal Democrat - St Albans)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make it his policy to introduce targets for the time taken by the Office of the Public Guardian to process and register (a) amendments and (b) cancellations to existing Lasting Powers of Attorney.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) keeps its performance targets under regular review to ensure they remain appropriate and aligned with demand and operational capacity. The performance metrics focus on the registration of new Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) and the discharge of statutory responsibilities. OPG already operates published targets for the registration of LPAs, with performance reported annually.
In 2024–25, the average processing times for LPAs and Enduring Powers of Attorney reduced significantly to 49 working days, down from 76 working days in 2023–24. This improvement reflects sustained efforts to clear a backlog of applications. Amendments to, and cancellations of, existing LPAs vary in complexity, and their timeliness is monitored through internal performance management arrangements. The organisation does not collect or publish detailed operational data on the processing times for deeds of revocation. While OPG aims to process such requests within 15 working days of receipt, it does not record individual clearance times for these cases. As a result, the shortest, median and longest processing times for cancellation requests in 2025 cannot be provided.
Existing guidance on GOV.UK explains the process for revoking an LPA, including the requirement for a donor to complete a Deed of Revocation in the prescribed form. OPG keeps its published guidance under regular review. While OPG does not currently publish specific guidance on the precise legal point at which an LPA is considered revoked, the legal position is set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), an LPA is revoked once the donor has executed a valid Deed of Revocation and notified OPG. OPG will continue to review its guidance to ensure it remains clear, accessible and aligned with statutory requirements.
Asked by: Daisy Cooper (Liberal Democrat - St Albans)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what is the (a) shortest, (b) median and (b) longest time taken by the Office of the Public Guardian to process a cancellation request for an existing Lasting Power of Attorney in 2025.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) keeps its performance targets under regular review to ensure they remain appropriate and aligned with demand and operational capacity. The performance metrics focus on the registration of new Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) and the discharge of statutory responsibilities. OPG already operates published targets for the registration of LPAs, with performance reported annually.
In 2024–25, the average processing times for LPAs and Enduring Powers of Attorney reduced significantly to 49 working days, down from 76 working days in 2023–24. This improvement reflects sustained efforts to clear a backlog of applications. Amendments to, and cancellations of, existing LPAs vary in complexity, and their timeliness is monitored through internal performance management arrangements. The organisation does not collect or publish detailed operational data on the processing times for deeds of revocation. While OPG aims to process such requests within 15 working days of receipt, it does not record individual clearance times for these cases. As a result, the shortest, median and longest processing times for cancellation requests in 2025 cannot be provided.
Existing guidance on GOV.UK explains the process for revoking an LPA, including the requirement for a donor to complete a Deed of Revocation in the prescribed form. OPG keeps its published guidance under regular review. While OPG does not currently publish specific guidance on the precise legal point at which an LPA is considered revoked, the legal position is set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), an LPA is revoked once the donor has executed a valid Deed of Revocation and notified OPG. OPG will continue to review its guidance to ensure it remains clear, accessible and aligned with statutory requirements.
Asked by: Daisy Cooper (Liberal Democrat - St Albans)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will instruct the Office of the Public Guardian to publish guidance on the point at which a signed Deed of Revocation of a Last Power of Attorney is revoked.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) keeps its performance targets under regular review to ensure they remain appropriate and aligned with demand and operational capacity. The performance metrics focus on the registration of new Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) and the discharge of statutory responsibilities. OPG already operates published targets for the registration of LPAs, with performance reported annually.
In 2024–25, the average processing times for LPAs and Enduring Powers of Attorney reduced significantly to 49 working days, down from 76 working days in 2023–24. This improvement reflects sustained efforts to clear a backlog of applications. Amendments to, and cancellations of, existing LPAs vary in complexity, and their timeliness is monitored through internal performance management arrangements. The organisation does not collect or publish detailed operational data on the processing times for deeds of revocation. While OPG aims to process such requests within 15 working days of receipt, it does not record individual clearance times for these cases. As a result, the shortest, median and longest processing times for cancellation requests in 2025 cannot be provided.
Existing guidance on GOV.UK explains the process for revoking an LPA, including the requirement for a donor to complete a Deed of Revocation in the prescribed form. OPG keeps its published guidance under regular review. While OPG does not currently publish specific guidance on the precise legal point at which an LPA is considered revoked, the legal position is set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), an LPA is revoked once the donor has executed a valid Deed of Revocation and notified OPG. OPG will continue to review its guidance to ensure it remains clear, accessible and aligned with statutory requirements.
Asked by: Baroness Berridge (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the results of the two-tiered test of enhanced support for jurors in Crown Courts centres that was announced in May 2024.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging.
The “Enhanced Support for Jurors” pilot concluded in March 2025 and is currently being evaluated. The results will help inform longer-term support for jurors, including in cases involving serious violence or sexual offending.
If a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP or the NHS 111 helpline, which includes a dedicated mental health option.
Asked by: Baroness Berridge (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the psychological and mental health impact on jurors of sitting on serious cases of physical or sexual violence.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging.
The “Enhanced Support for Jurors” pilot concluded in March 2025 and is currently being evaluated. The results will help inform longer-term support for jurors, including in cases involving serious violence or sexual offending.
If a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP or the NHS 111 helpline, which includes a dedicated mental health option.