header-logo header-logo

20 November 2019
Issue: 7865 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Stats reveal ‘broken’ justice

The total number of individuals formally dealt with by the criminal justice system is at the lowest since records began, Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures have revealed

The figure, of 1.58 million people between July 2018 and June 2019, represents a fall of two per cent on the previous year. Meanwhile, the number of defendants prosecuted at magistrates’ courts, 1.37 million in the same period, has continued to decline since June 2016 and also fell by two per cent.

In the same period, police recorded crime rose overall by six per cent to 5.3m offences, excluding fraud.

The latest statistics, published last week, also found that the conviction ratio remained stable at 87%, while 10% fewer defendants were remanded on bail by the police and the custody rate decreased 6.5% to 74,800, the lowest since 2009.

While fewer suspects are being prosecuted, those who are convicted are spending longer in prison―average custodial sentence lengths have been steadily rising since June 2009, from 16.3 to 20.3 months for indictable offences and from 13.5 to 17.4 months overall.

Richard Atkins QC, Chair of the Bar Council said: ‘It will be a major concern to victims of crime and anyone who cares about the criminal justice system that the figures show that while recorded crime has been rising, prosecutions and out of court disposals have fallen.

‘The inescapable fact is that the disproportionate cuts to the criminal justice budget over many years has broken the system. Only a considerable investment in the criminal justice system by the next government will reverse the damage and restore public confidence.’

In her ‘Monday Message’ blog, Criminal Bar Association chair, Caroline Goodwin QC cited a recently published Institute of Government report, ‘The Performance Tracker 2019’. The report noted criminal cases have decreased in number but increased in complexity, requiring the courts to ‘make savings to meet demands’.

Issue: 7865 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—Charlotte Coleman & Qaisar Sheikh

Winckworth Sherwood—Charlotte Coleman & Qaisar Sheikh

Two promoted to partner in property litigation and education teams

Dorsey & Whitney LLP—Peter Knust

Dorsey & Whitney LLP—Peter Knust

Cross-border finance and restructuring specialist joins as of counsel in London

Powell Gilbert—Callum Beamish-Lacey

Powell Gilbert—Callum Beamish-Lacey

IP firm promotes litigator to partnership

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll