header-logo header-logo

26 July 2013
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New court structure?

"Public interest corporation" could take over the courts

The government is considering handing over the running of the courts and tribunal system to an “independent public interest corporation”.

In a letter sent to judges this week, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge and the senior president of tribunals Sir Jeremy Sullivan say: “A variety of difficult decisions will be required as to the appropriate level at which fees are set and about how best to deliver access to justice and value for money for the taxpayer.”

They are considering “whether the current structures could be transformed” or “whether an alternative structure, such as a more independent public interest corporation, would better ensure a sustainable future”. The aim would be “to ensure adequate investment and where consistent with the administration of justice, options to generate and retain additional income and capital for investment”.

However, they pledge not to erode the constitutional principles underpinning the administration of justice.

They state: “We are not and will not be exploring any options which will involve shareholders, the making of a profit or surplus or contracting out or profit-making on the basis of judicial and linked administrative functions, other than for the exclusive purpose of investing any surplus into the administration of justice.

“No replacement organisation for HMCTS would be contemplated unless it was a body operated solely in the public interest.”

In May, the Ministry of Justice denied it had plans for the “wholesale privatisation” of the courts and tribunals service. In March, Grayling said the MoJ was looking for ways to “raise the revenue and investment” necessary for modernisation.

Issue: 7571 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll