Select Committee · Justice Committee

Work of the County Court

Status: Closed Opened: 21 Jan 2025 Closed: 22 Apr 2026 13 recommendations 30 conclusions 1 report

This inquiry examines the Work of the County Court amid long-standing concerns over court capacity and resources. It comes as data on the work of the County Court shows the time taken from claim to hearing continues to rise. Read the Call for evidence to find out more about this inquiry .

Clear

Reports

1 report
Title HC No. Published Items Response
4th Report - Work of the County Court HC 677 21 Jul 2025 43 Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

17 items
2 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

County Court delays are unacceptable and exacerbated pre-existing trends in the justice system.

‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ has never been more relevant to the work of the County Court: the current level of delays is unacceptable. Whilst we recognise the pandemic significantly contributed to the backlog in cases, the available data clearly shows it only exacerbated existing trends. The rising caseload, and …

Government response. The government acknowledges unacceptable delays for trials and commits to increasing judicial recruitment, enhancing digital working, and implementing the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project to streamline document management and improve case progression.
Ministry of Justice
5 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Develop programme to reduce County Court delays to pre-2015 levels by end of Parliament.

As part of any future review, HMCTS must develop a manageable programme to reduce the delays to pre-2015 levels by the end of this Parliament. (Recommendation, Paragraph 33) 55

Government response. The government commits to developing a cross-jurisdictional Remote Participation Strategy to improve consistency, efficiency, and accessibility in using remote hearings, aiming to reduce County Court delays and ease pressure on resources.
Ministry of Justice
6 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Block listing negatively impacts court users and undermines trust in the County Court system.

We recognise the role that block listing plays in providing flexibility to the schedule considering the high settlement rate in the County Court. However, we have heard concerns that it negatively impacts court users through financial implications and the increased frustrations of all parties resulting in more people settling as …

Government response. The government details an action plan to improve County Court contact services, including integrating Civil Auto File Share (CAFS), implementing a multiskilling programme for call handlers, introducing clearer contact points, and rolling out webchat and query management tools.
Ministry of Justice
7 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Collect data on listing and settlement rates to minimise County Court over-listing practices.

HMCTS, together with the Judiciary, must work together to collect the necessary data on listing and settlement rates to allow for data-informed listing practices ensuring any over-listing is minimised. (Recommendation, Paragraph 42)

Government response. The government states a roadmap is developed to improve the Find a Court or Tribunal (FaCT) system, including auditing content, reviewing policies, engaging user groups, and delivering improvements by September 2026.
Ministry of Justice
8 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Enable litigants to recover wasted costs from HMCTS due to poor court administration.

Litigants must be able to recover the legal, travel, and subsistence costs from HMCTS wasted as a result of over-listing and/or poor court administration preventing their cases from being heard. (Recommendation, Paragraph 43)

Government response. The government states it commissioned the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) to review judicial salary structures, with a report due in November 2026, and will concurrently review regional District Judge recruitment exercises concluding in Spring 2026.
Ministry of Justice
11 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Integrate CNBC with local court systems and introduce allocated claims handlers for claimants.

The CNBC must be integrated with local court case management systems to improve coordination and responsiveness. Allocated claims handlers and a clear point of contact must be introduced to ensure claimants can speak with someone knowledgeable and responsible for their case as it progresses through the County Court system. (Recommendation, …

Government response. The government details work by the Online Procedure Rules Committee on new procedure rules for digital services, provides existing grant funding for legal support, and commits to working with the judiciary on further guidance and considering AI support for this …
Ministry of Justice
26 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Introduce standardised process for court staff to proactively engage on user access requirements.

HMCTS must introduce a standardised process by which Court and judicial listing staff proactively engage with court users on any access requirements for litigants, witnesses or legal practitioners prior to listing cases. (Recommendation, Paragraph 112) 58 Digitisation

Government response. The government accepts the objective but states that a system is already in place for court users to notify HMCTS of any reasonable adjustment requests, with the process outlined on the GOV.UK website.
Ministry of Justice
29 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Co-design all future digital reforms with users and extensively pilot before rollout

All future digital reforms must be co-designed with users and stakeholders and should not be rolled out until they have proven reliable through extensive piloting and testing. (Recommendation, Paragraph 128)

Government response. The government accepts the recommendation, affirming that HMCTS's approach to designing digital services already involves extensive user research, co-design with users, and thorough piloting and testing, which will continue for all future digital reforms.
Ministry of Justice
30 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Review and urgently prioritise digitisation of all descoped work within the Ministry of Justice

The Ministry of Justice must, as a matter of urgency, review all descoped work and prioritise its digitisation. Without this, we are left with an incomplete and inefficient system at significant public expense. (Recommendation, Paragraph 129)

Government response. The government states HMCTS has reviewed the descoped civil work, acknowledges the need for further digitalization, and is implementing the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) system to modernize case file handling and improve efficiency.
Ministry of Justice
32 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

County Court's continued reliance on paper files causes significant delays and inefficiencies

It is very difficult to understand why the County Court continues to rely on paper files, which need to be shipped around the country at great cost. Paper is a serious cause of the delays in the County Court, caused by a “patchwork” of systems and case reference numbers, and …

Government response. The government acknowledges the concern and is already implementing the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project to digitize paper files, enable electronic transfer between courts, and work towards a fully paperless Civil National Business Centre.
Ministry of Justice
34 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Replace postal services for paper files with electronic methods; implement opt-in postal options

Use of postal services for sending paper files must be replaced with email or other electronic methods. Postal options should be an opt-in service as already implemented across multiple Government agencies to effectively mitigate against digital exclusion. (Recommendation, Paragraph 138)

Government response. The government accepts the recommendation and is rolling out the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project via Microsoft PowerApps to increase electronic document management, aiming to eliminate reliance on physical post and ensure electronic transfer of case files.
Ministry of Justice
35 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Enhance existing electronic systems to support uploading of larger documents for all County Court claims

HMCTS must enhance existing electronic systems to support the upload of larger documents for all types of claims heard in the County Court. (Recommendation, Paragraph 139) 59 Other opportunities for reform

Government response. The government accepts, stating that new digital systems already support most documents with limits of 1GB for documents and 500MB for multimedia, and they will complete a review of the more restrictive limits for email submissions.
Ministry of Justice
36 Conclusion 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Mediation demonstrates early success as a viable, quicker out-of-court route in County Court

Mediation is a viable out of court route with early signs of success in the County Court. It offers claimants a quicker route to seeking justice, one not beset by delays or missing files. (Conclusion, Paragraph 146)

Government response. The government accepts the conclusion, noting that a pilot for mandatory small claims mediation is in place until May 2026 and will be evaluated to inform decisions on its extension or expansion to other claim types.
Ministry of Justice
37 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Evaluate mandatory mediation deployment in other claim types as part of future County Court reviews

As part of any future review into the County Court, an evaluation of mandatory mediation must be undertaken to understand whether it can be effectively deployed in other claim types. (Recommendation, Paragraph 147)

Government response. The government accepts the recommendation, stating that an evaluation and review of the mandatory mediation pilot (running until May 2026) will be undertaken, with findings informing decisions on future expansion to other claim types.
Ministry of Justice
39 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Prioritise rolling out well-regarded existing digital systems from other jurisdictions for HMCTS

Following the completion of the £1 billion Reform Programme, HMCTS must prioritise the roll out of existing systems from other jurisdictions, such as CE Filing, which are well-regarded by legal professionals. These should not be replaced for the sake of change alone; instead, efforts must focus on integration and interoperability, …

Government response. The government accepts and has a project underway to continue providing a digital case management and e-Filing solution in the High Court, with a key requirement for improved operability with existing Civil, Family, and Tribunals platforms.
Ministry of Justice
40 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Launch consultation on effectively using AI to improve County Court performance and operations by 2026

The Ministry of Justice must launch a consultation, into how it plans to effectively use AI to improve the performance and operations of the County Court and report its conclusions by the end of 2026. (Recommendation, Paragraph 156) Conclusions on the Work of the County Court

Government response. The government accepts in part, stating that the Ministry of Justice has already conducted consultations and published the AI Action Plan for Justice in July 2025, which outlines their approach and ongoing pilots for AI adoption in the justice system.
Ministry of Justice
42 Recommendation 4th Report - Work of the County Court Accepted

Lack of clear plans to address well-established County Court inefficiencies and delays persists

The causes of the inefficiencies and delays in the County Court are well- established, and openly recognised by Ministers and officials, yet it is unclear how HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), together with the Judiciary and the Ministry of Justice, intends to address them. The recent reviews into both …

Government response. HMCTS is exploring the development of predictive analytical tools, underpinned by machine learning, to support better administration of listing.
Ministry of Justice

Oral evidence sessions

3 sessions
Date Witnesses
8 Apr 2025 Daniel Flury · HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Jason Latham · HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Sarah Sackman MP · Ministry of Justice, Steven Jarman · Ministry of Justice View ↗
18 Mar 2025 Lord Justice Colin Birss · Judiciary of England and Wales, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Vos · Judiciary of England and Wales View ↗
7 May 2024 Dr Natalie Byrom · Faculty of Laws, UCL, Elizabeth Gallagher · Temple Garden Chambers, Emily Giles · The Hyde Group, Matthew Maxwell Scott · The Association of Consumer Support Organisations (ACSO) View ↗

Correspondence

3 letters
DateDirectionTitle
9 Dec 2025 Correspondence from Sarah Sackman KC MP, Minister for Courts and Legal Services…
10 Jun 2025 Correspondence from Daniel Flury, HMCTS Operations Director, dated 29 May 2025 …
21 May 2025 Correspondence from Sarah Sackman KC MP, Minister for Courts and Legal Services…