header-logo header-logo

22 October 2025
Issue: 8136 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , In Court
printer mail-detail

Full review of county court rejected

Ministers have rejected the Justice Committee review’s key recommendation for the ailing county court system—an ‘urgent and comprehensive’ review by spring at the latest

In July, the cross-party parliamentary committee published a devastating review, ‘Work of the county court’. It found the county court system to be ‘dysfunctional’, citing building hazards such as leaky roofs and rats, as well as incompatible IT systems despite a decade-long digital upgrade project. Phone calls and emails to individual courts went unanswered while cases were subject to ‘unacceptable and increasing delays’, averaging 50 weeks from issue to trial for small claims and nearly 75 weeks for fast, intermediate and multi-track claims (according to Ministry of Justice (MoJ) quarterly statistics up to March 2025).

Responding last week, however, the MoJ said: ‘Rather than focusing on a root and branch review of the county court, the government is keen to focus on taking tangible and practical steps to improve the operation of the county court—which will benefit everyday users—without further delay.’  

The MoJ said ‘promising progress’ has been made, highlighting that improvements to the document management system through the Civil Auto File Share (CAFS) project will be delivered by the end of the year. ‘CAFS will end the slow and costly practice of the Civil National Business Centre producing paper files and posting them to courts with the risk of them being mislaid and where they then need to be stored,’ it said.

Andy Slaughter MP, chair of the Justice Committee, responded that a comprehensive review remains ‘essential’ as ‘without it, it is unclear how fundamental reform will be achieved’.

CILEX president Sara Fowler said ‘a postcode lottery’ operates with ‘significant delays’ in large cities and more efficient processing in smaller cities. She called for more remote hearings where appropriate and an independent analysis of spending and future funding needs.

Issue: 8136 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll