Source · Select Committees · Justice Committee
4th Report - Work of the County Court
Justice Committee
HC 677
Published 21 July 2025
Recommendations
22
Deferred
Publish a detailed breakdown of £220 million capital funding spent on court repairs and maintenance.
Recommendation
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice and HMCTS publish a detailed breakdown of how the £220 million in capital funding was spent between March 2023 and March 2025. The breakdown should include further information as to the type of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government's response discussed a pilot for mandatory small claims mediation and its future evaluation, completely unrelated to the recommendation on capital funding for court maintenance.
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
26
Accepted
Introduce standardised process for court staff to proactively engage on user access requirements.
Recommendation
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
Read more
Government Response Summary
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
View Details →
29
Accepted
Co-design all future digital reforms with users and extensively pilot before rollout
Recommendation
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 Summary
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
View Details →
30
Accepted
Review and urgently prioritise digitisation of all descoped work within the Ministry of Justice
Recommendation
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 Summary
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
View Details →
31
Accepted in Part
Introduce a single integrated case management system providing real-time status updates for all cases
Recommendation
A single case management system must be introduced to provide real time status updates for all cases, integrating both Reform and legacy systems. (Recommendation, Paragraph 130)
Government Response Summary
The government accepts the recommendation in principle, stating real-time status updates are available on new digital services and will be introduced as part of possession digitalisation, but does not explicitly commit to a single system integrating all legacy and Reform cases.
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
33
Accepted in Part
Issue a single reference number for all claims, integrating paper and digital systems
Recommendation
All claims must be issued a single reference number regardless of the “off-ramps and on-ramps” between paper and digital systems. (Recommendation, Paragraph 137)
Government Response Summary
The government accepts in part, stating that HMCTS systems use different case numbers but they are updating Reform systems to ensure users are provided with the correct applicable reference numbers for each case, regardless of system transitions.
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
34
Accepted
Replace postal services for paper files with electronic methods; implement opt-in postal options
Recommendation
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)
Read more
Government Response Summary
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
View Details →
35
Accepted
Enhance existing electronic systems to support uploading of larger documents for all County Court claims
Recommendation
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 Summary
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
View Details →
37
Accepted
Evaluate mandatory mediation deployment in other claim types as part of future County Court reviews
Recommendation
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 Summary
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
View Details →
39
Accepted
Prioritise rolling out well-regarded existing digital systems from other jurisdictions for HMCTS
Recommendation
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 …
Read more
Government Response Summary
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
View Details →
40
Accepted
Launch consultation on effectively using AI to improve County Court performance and operations by 2026
Recommendation
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 …
Read more
Government Response Summary
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
View Details →
42
Accepted
Lack of clear plans to address well-established County Court inefficiencies and delays persists
Recommendation
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 …
Read more
Government Response Summary
HMCTS is exploring the development of predictive analytical tools, underpinned by machine learning, to support better administration of listing.
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
43
Rejected
Launch urgent, comprehensive, root-and-branch review of the County Court by Spring 2026
Recommendation
We recommend an urgent and comprehensive, root-and-branch review of the County Court. This review must be launched by Spring 2026 and encompass recruitment and retention challenges within both the Judiciary and HMCTS, establish a realistic and sustainable plan for future …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejected the recommendation for a root-and-branch review, stating they prefer to focus on tangible and practical steps already underway to improve County Court operations, such as improved timeliness of claims, call waiting times, and case management systems.
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
Conclusions (30)
1
Conclusion
Acknowledged
The criminal justice system is often the focus of mainstream attention and gets recognition for delivering justice, but with over a million claims each year, and a vast jurisdiction, the County Court is where most citizens and businesses encounter the justice system. It is imperative that the improvement of the …
Government Response Summary
The government vaguely commits to reviewing its civil justice data and considering whether improvements could be made to its publication processes, without directly addressing the recommendation to make County Court improvement a key priority.
2
Conclusion
Accepted
‘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 Summary
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.
3
Conclusion
Acknowledged
The civil justice quarterly statistics do not aid transparency or allow for effective data-led scrutiny into the performances of individual courts. The County Court is known to house significant regional variation across England and Wales yet there is no evidence of pro-active measurement of these regional differences, analysis of why …
Government Response Summary
The government agrees on the importance of data-informed listing practices and states that HMCTS is currently exploring the development of predictive analytical tools using machine learning to support better administration of listing.
4
Conclusion
Rejected
HMCTS must collect and publish data on individual court and tribunal performances to allow for the identification of regional disparities, and support investment planning in reducing County Court delays. The data must include the timeliness of pre-trial stages, rates of settlement and enable HMCTS’ performance to be measured against published …
Government Response Summary
The government states that listing is a judicial function requiring over-listing, and that the better strategic solution is improved, data-informed listing, without committing to collecting or publishing the specific granular court and tribunal performance data requested.
5
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
6
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
7
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
8
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
9
Conclusion
Acknowledged
HMCTS, and the Ministry of Justice, must facilitate the greater use of remote hearings, working alongside the Senior Judiciary to provide national guidance outlining when virtual hearings should be used. (Recommendation, Paragraph 44) Contacting the County Court
Government Response Summary
The government states it is progressing work by planning to review and restate the County Court operating model and revisit its resource model to align with workload demand and post-Reform ways of working, but does not commit to producing specific national guidance on the use of virtual hearings.
10
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Despite its intended aim of simplifying the operation of the County Court, the centralisation of essential court operations has had a devastating impact on the delivery of justice, entrenching the postcode lottery and results in debilitating delays for all parties. The current methods of contacting a county court do not …
Government Response Summary
The government states it already publishes some information on claimant representation status and will review existing court data to consider whether further granular data can be made available.
11
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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 program from October.
12
Conclusion
Deferred
‘Court and tribunal’ finder must be updated with up-to-date information about each county court, what type of claims they hear and all essential contact information. (Recommendation, Paragraph 55) 56 Judicial and staff capacity
Government Response Summary
The government committed to providing a spending breakdown to the committee by March 2026 and highlighted increased funding for court capital maintenance, but did not address the recommendation about updating the court finder with specific court information.
13
Conclusion
Deferred
While we welcome the recent introduction of location-based advertising for full-time judicial roles, the civil judiciary is no longer an attractive profession. It is vital more is done to attract high performing candidates to the district-bench. (Conclusion, Paragraph 64)
Government Response Summary
The government stated it would review the data it collects on the condition of the court estate and consider improvements, with outcomes provided by March 2026, but did not address the recommendation on attracting high-performing candidates to judicial roles.
14
Conclusion
Deferred
Any review into the County Court must include an evaluation of its judicial recruitment offer. This has to consider pay and progression opportunities, an assessment of the current working conditions, and evaluate the regional recruitment initiatives. (Recommendation, Paragraph 65)
Government Response Summary
The government stated it is developing an accessibility strategy for courts and tribunals services and investing over £1 million in lift replacement projects in 2025/26, but did not address the recommendation for a review of the County Court's judicial recruitment offer.
15
Conclusion
Deferred
The Committee would like to pay tribute to the dedication and hard work of frontline staff in the County Court. However, the current staffing crisis in HMCTS is untenable, impeding its ability to support County Court users and ensuring efficient access to justice. (Conclusion, Paragraph 74)
Government Response Summary
The government stated that a system for requesting reasonable adjustments is already in place for court users, but did not address the concern about the staffing crisis in HMCTS.
16
Conclusion
Deferred
A future review must include an in-depth assessment of the recruitment and retention crisis of the County Court, extending the existing discussions regarding HMCTS pay scales to include assessments of current and required workload capacities ensuring any additional resource is effectively allocated where it is needed most. This assessment needs …
Government Response Summary
The government outlined HMCTS's approach to designing digital services, which includes user research and co-design in line with the Government Service Standard, but did not address the recommendation for an assessment of the County Court's recruitment and retention crisis.
17
Conclusion
Deferred
Despite persistent calls, litigants-in-person are not adequately supported through the court process. The language used in court applications is inaccessible, court procedure is not explained, and there is limited support available. The insufficient data collection on the prevalence of litigants-in- person means the Ministry of Justice cannot understand how to …
Government Response Summary
The government highlighted benefits of existing digital services and the new Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) system for modernising civil case file handling, but did not specifically address the lack of adequate support, accessible language, or data collection for litigants-in-person.
18
Conclusion
Deferred
HMCTS must increase the collection and publication of data on litigants-in- person. This needs to include the type of claim, timeliness of issue to trial or settlement, and court location. (Recommendation, Paragraph 86)
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledged the value of real-time status updates for users and confirmed their availability on new digital services and planned introduction for possession digitalisation, but did not commit to increasing the collection and publication of data specifically on litigants-in-person.
19
Conclusion
Deferred
The Ministry of Justice and Civil Justice Council must publish guidance for litigants-in-person. It needs to explain the claims process, their responsibilities, and the implications of failing to comply with deadlines. This must be written in clear, accessible language and be available in accessible formats. (Recommendation, Paragraph 87) 57 Condition …
Government Response Summary
The government stated HMCTS is updating Reform systems to provide consistent case reference numbers for users, but did not address the recommendation to publish specific guidance for litigants-in-person.
20
Conclusion
Deferred
It is unacceptable that the court estate has been allowed to enter such disrepair due to years of capital underfunding. While we welcome the Minister’s acknowledgement of the “chronic” underinvestment within the court estate, this Government must end the cycle of underfunding. (Conclusion, Paragraph 99)
Government Response Summary
The government detailed the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project, which is introducing a new system to increase electronic document management and streamline workflows within the Civil National Business Centre, but did not address the concerns about the disrepair and underfunding of the physical court estate.
21
Conclusion
Deferred
We are concerned by HMCTS’ failure to recognise the importance of the condition of the physical estate for both the functioning of courts and the public’s perception of civil justice. We have both seen and heard of unacceptable examples of poorly maintained court buildings, its impact on staff morale, and …
Government Response Summary
The government explained the document upload limits for new digital systems and committed to reviewing the current lower limit for email submissions, but did not address the concerns about the condition of the physical court estate, maintenance backlog, or funding transparency.
23
Conclusion
Deferred
HMCTS must collect and publish regular data on the condition of the court estate. This is imperative to informing preventative repairs. (Recommendation, Paragraph 102)
Government Response Summary
The government's response discussed a project for a digital case management and e-Filing solution in the High Court, which is unrelated to collecting and publishing data on the condition of the court estate.
24
Conclusion
Deferred
We recognise the difficulty in retrofitting old court buildings to meet the required accessibility standards set out in Section 20 of the Equality Act
Government Response Summary
The government's response, despite stating 'Accept in part,' detailed its AI Action Plan for Justice and various AI pilots, which is unrelated to the committee's conclusion regarding the difficulty of retrofitting old court buildings for accessibility.
25
Conclusion
Acknowledged
All works to increase accessibility, in all of its aspects, of the court estate must be prioritised and delivered at pace. It is not satisfactory for lift repairs to take months, or for disabled users to be taken through back entrances in order to access the County Court. Any review …
Government Response Summary
The government stated it is focusing on tangible steps to improve the County Court and highlighted general operational improvements, but it did not commit to specific measurable targets, timelines, or a costed budget for accessibility works as requested.
27
Conclusion
Acknowledged
The Reform programme was over ambitious and ultimately under-delivered. We acknowledge the diverse range of jurisdictions that fall within the County Court which may have contributed to the challenges the programme faced. However, we are not satisfied with HMCTS’ evidence: it offered weak justifications and failed to adequately acknowledge the …
Government Response Summary
The government accepts the committee's findings and states that HMCTS has learned lessons from the Reform programme, adjusting and improving its approach to designing future digital services through user research, co-design, piloting, and testing.
28
Conclusion
Acknowledged
The civil projects that were delivered under the Reform programme were not sufficiently tested with practitioners in mind. As a result, the avoidable failures of Reform have led to unacceptable amounts of dual running, with one claim requiring interactions with multiple systems, and further inefficiencies in the County Court. (Conclusion, …
Government Response Summary
The government accepts the committee's findings and confirms that HMCTS has learned from the Reform programme, now adopting an improved approach to designing digital services that includes extensive user research, co-design, piloting, and testing for all future reforms.
32
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
36
Conclusion
Accepted
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 Summary
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.
38
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
Despite the bold ambitions of the Ministry of Justice, the piecemeal approach that has been taken to digitisation hampers any intentions of adopting a fully digital court process. Existing systems inhibit the early adoption of AI or a move to digital court bundles despite the innovation occurring in the legal …
Government Response Summary
The government accepts in part, detailing the AI Action Plan for Justice published in July 2025 which outlines a responsible approach to AI adoption across the justice system, and highlighting ongoing HMCTS pilots for AI-powered solutions to improve court operations.
41
Conclusion
Rejected
The County Court is the ‘Cinderella service’ of the justice system in England and Wales. It is beset by delays as a result of a failed attempt at digital reform, recruitment and retention issues, and a complex and dysfunctional “patchwork” of outdated paper-based and digital systems. (Conclusion, Paragraph 157)
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation for a root and branch review, preferring to focus on practical steps to improve the County Court's operation, highlighting improvements already seen in timeliness, call waiting times, mediation, and case management.