Recommendation 22

MoJ confirmed that the proportion of ineffective trials–those that do not go ahead on the planned date and are relisted for later dates–had dropped from 27% at the end of 2023 to 25% in September 2024.55 MoJ acknowledged that this rate remained “far too high”, and it is much higher than the pre– pandemic rate, which the NAO’s report shows was consistently close to 15% between 2014 and 2019.56 MoJ attributed the high proportion of ineffective trials to “running the system much hotter”, arguing that increasing the number of sitting days inevitably leads to an increase in ineffective trials.57 MoJ confirmed that judicial capacity is no longer a constraint on the number of trials that can be listed, but we were concerned to hear that over–listing of cases has contributed to the increased proportion of ineffective trials. While it is right that a degree of over–listing occurs to ensure that court time is not wasted when cases do not go ahead for unavoidable reasons, as we have already noted there is a huge impact on victims when their 50 Qq 78, 79 51 Q 81 52 Qq 9, 15, 25, 44, 45, 47 53 Q 33 54 Qq 32–33; C&AG‘s Report, para 18 55 Q 6; C&AG‘s Report, para 2.18 56 Q 6; C&AG‘s Report, Figure 9 57 Q 6 17 cases do not proceed on the day expected. HMCTS told us that there is an assessment of listing policies under way by the judiciary, and we look forward to its report, which is due in the spring.58