National statistics

Civil Justice Statistics Quarterly: January to March 2022

Published 1 June 2022

1. Main Points

---

Covid-19 and associated actions are still having an impact on all civil actions	This quarter, civil justice actions remain below pre-Covid19 levels. Volumes of all actions have stabilised after the marked recovery sparked by measures undertaken by the courts in the second half of 2020. This publication will therefore focus largely on comparisons with the same quarter in 2019 (as a pre-Covid19 baseline).
Decrease in County Court claims driven by money claims	In January to March 2022, County Court claims were down 24% on the same period in 2019, to 409,000. Of these, 340,000 (83%) were money claims (down 22%). Compared to the same quarter in 2021, County Court claims were up 1%.
Damages claims were down 22% at 26,000	The fall in damages claims was driven by decreases in Personal Injury claims (down 39% to 18,000) compared to the same quarter in 2019. This was offset by Other Damages claims (up 150% to 7,500). Compared to the same quarter in 2021, total damages claims have fallen (down 23%).
The number of claims defended and number of trials remains below figures in 2019	There were 66,000 claims defended (down 10%) and 13,000 claims that went to trial in January to March 2022 (down 14%) compared to the same quarter in 2019. Claims defended were down 3% and claims that went to trial decreased by 7%, compared to the same quarter in 2021.
Mean time taken from claim to hearing has increased	The mean time taken for small claims and multi/fast track claims to go to trial was 51.4 weeks and 73.0 weeks, 14.5 weeks longer than the same period in 2019 for both. These measures remained stable for small claims and multi/fast track claims compared to the same quarter in 2021.
Judgments were down 37% and default judgments were down 36%	Judgments were down 37% (to 229,000) in January to March 2022, compared to the same period in 2019; with 90% of these being default judgments. Compared to the same period in 2021, judgments were down 12%.
13,000 enforcement applications and 10,000 enforcement orders made	Enforcement applications were down 45%, while enforcement orders were also down 45% when compared to the same quarter in 2019. Compared to 2021, enforcement applications were down 31% while enforcement orders were down 2%.
70,000 warrants were issued	Warrants issued were down 27% when compared to the same quarter in 2019 and up 4% compared to 2021.
550 judicial review applications in Q1 2022	There were 550 applications for Judicial Reviews in Q1 2022, down 9% on Q1 2021. Of the 150 cases in 2022 that reached the permission stage, 10 (7%) were found to be ‘totally without merit’.
Record high number of days sat by judges	There were 330,000 days sat by judges in 2021, up from 277,000 (an increase of 19%) in 2020. This is the highest number of days sat in the recorded series.

This publication gives civil county court statistics for the latest quarter (January to March 2022), compared to the same quarter in 2019 (pre-Covid19). The judicial review figures cover the period up to January to March 2022, and The Royal Courts of Justice statistics (published annually) cover the period January to December 2021. For more details, please see the supporting document.

Statistics on the Business and Property Court for England and Wales have also been published alongside this quarterly bulletin as Official Statistics. For technical detail, please refer to the accompanying support document.

For general feedback related to the content of this publication, please contact us at: CAJS@justice.gov.uk

---

2. Statistician’s comment

---

Following initial recovery from the impact of Covid-19 in the first half of 2020, volumes across most Civil Justice actions have remained relatively stable since Q1 2021, although numbers remain below pre-pandemic levels. For this reason, we continue to compare the data from this quarter with the equivalent quarter in 2019 (as a pre-Covid19 baseline) for a more meaningful assessment of trends and performance and a better measure of how the civil process “returns to normal”. We expect to return to the usual practice in due course. Should users wish to compare latest outturn against 2020 and 2021, they can do so using the accompanying statistical tables.

This quarter, total claim volumes have reached their highest level since Q1 2020, albeit still below the pre-Covid19 peak. Personal injury claims have continued a downwards trend since Q2 2021 to 39% below the same quarter in 2019. On the contrary, “other” damages claims remain considerably above previous years (up 150% on the 2019 comparator), although these have fallen compared to the previous 4 quarters reported and may show early signs of levelling off. This increase is a result of PPI-related claims that rely on a section of the Consumer Credit Act that relates to unfair relationships and follows a series of court rulings on the matter.

The balance of claims being allocated to small claims has increased considerably to 67% compared to the same quarter in 2019 (57%), whereas the proportion of claims allocated to the fast track has fallen over this period. This is likely due to government changes to the claims process for low value road traffic accident (RTA) related personal injury claims. As part of the package of measures introduced, the Small Claims Track limit for RTA related Personal Injury claims increased from £1,000 to £5,000. This means that the majority of such claims will now proceed through the Small Claims Track instead of the Fast Track.

Following initial rises due to the impact of Covid-19, timeliness measures have remained considerably above pre-Covid19 levels, since Q1 2021. Although measures implemented following the pandemic, such as the opening of Covid-secure courtrooms and the increase in hearings by remote means will have benefited later cases, and as such contributed to timeliness measures remaining stable and not increasing further, we expect these measures to be impacted for as long as cases stayed during the pandemic remain in the caseload.

A 19% increase in number of days sat by judges in 2021, compared to the previous year, took this to a record high. However, with the courts still recovering from the impact of Covid-19, large backlogs remain in most jurisdictions. Extra funding was provided in the 2021/22 financial year to support this recovery from the pandemic and this fueled the sitting days record.

---

3. Claims Summary

---

County court claims were down 24% on the same quarter of 2019, driven by money claims.

There were 409,000 County Court claims lodged in January to March 2022. Of these, 366,000 were money and damages claims (down 22% from January to March 2019).

Non-money claim volumes were at 44,000, down 37% when compared to the same quarter in 2019.

Mortgage and landlord possession claims were down 40% over the same period to 22,000, ‘other non-money claims’ were down 36% to 19,000 and claims for return of goods were down 9% to 2,700.

---

Figure 1: County Court claims by type, Q1 (January to March) 2017 to Q1 (January to March) 2022 (Source: table 1.2)

In the most recent quarter, total claims were down 24% compared to the same period in 2019 (from 538,000 to 409,000). Of these, 366,000 were money and damages claims, down 22% from January to March 2019 (from 468,000). Money and damages claims made up 89% of all claims in January to March 2022, up 2pp on its share in January to March 2019.

Prior to the sharp fall in 2020, County Court claims had been generally increasing from 2015, reaching a peak of 565,000 claims in April to June 2017. This increase was driven by a rise in money claims, which make up the majority of claims received. Prior to 2020, claim volumes had been relatively unchanged but volatile, driven by a few “bulk issuers” slowing down and then ramping up their volume of claims. Claim volumes decreased significantly following the outbreak of Covid-19, with volumes remaining relatively stable since Q1 2021 after initial recovery towards pre-pandemic levels in the second half of 2020.

Non-money claims have been generally decreasing since 2015. While these showed less of an impact following Covid-19 in contrast to money and damages claims, the recovery to pre-Covid19 volumes has been slow. In the current quarter, these claims were down 37% (from 69,000 to 44,000) compared to the same period in 2019.

Within non-money claims, ‘other’ non-money claims have shown a decline since 2018. In the most recent quarter, these were down 36% (from 30,000 to 19,000) compared to the same period in 2019.

The overall trend in Mortgage and Landlord Possession claims has been decreasing since a peak of 60,000 in January to March 2014. There were 22,000 claims in January to March 2022, down 40% compared to the same quarter of 2019 (37,000 claims). This decrease has been driven by a fall in all claims types since March 2020 due to actions following Covid-19. Further details can be found in the Mortgage and Landlord Possessions publication [here].

Claims for return of goods increased steadily to a high of 3,500 in July-September 2018 but has since declined. However, there has been continued recovery in these figures in recent quarters, with volumes now only down 9% (from 3,000 to 2,700) in January to March 2022 compared to the same period in 2019.

---

4. Money Claims^{[footnote 1]}

---

Money claims were down 22% (to 340,000 claims) in January to March 2022 compared to the same quarter in 2019, driving the overall trend in money and damages claims.

Money claims of up to (and including) £1,000 were down 30% over this period to 209,000, driving the overall trend in money claims.

Damages claims were down 22% at 26,000, driven by decreases in Personal Injury claims, (down 39% to 18,000) compared to the same quarter in 2019.

Other - damages claims have partially offset this fall in personal injury claims, (up 150% to 7,500) compared to the same quarter in 2019. These accounted for 29% of all damages claims in the most recent quarter, up 20pp on January to March 2019, when they accounted for 9% of all damages claims.

---

Figure 2: Money claims by monetary value, Q1 (January to March) 2017 to Q1 (January to March) 2022 (Source: civil workload CSV^{[footnote 2]})

Historically, money claims reached a peak in October to December 2017, at which point the implementation of the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) for Debt Claims in October 2017 led to a sharp drop in claims. An increasing trend resumed the following quarter, suggesting that the impact of the PAP on claim volumes was temporary. The main aim of the protocol is to encourage early engagement between parties to resolve disputes without needing to start court proceedings. In the most recent quarter (January to March 2022), there were 340,000 claims, down 22% on the same quarter in 2019 (436,000 claims).

This quarter, the majority (83%) of money claims were processed and issued at the County Court Business Centre (CCBC). There were 282,000 such claims at the CCBC in January to March 2022 (down 24% on the same quarter in 2019). CCBC claims have been particularly affected by Covid-19 and associated actions, with a more significant decrease than other money claims, but they have now returned to historic trend levels. For comparison, they made up 85% of money claims in January to March 2019. This is as a result of bulk issuers almost completely ceasing their issue during the immediate response to the pandemic and now increasing these volumes.

The change in money claims is driven by lower value claims (under £1,000). These were down 30% to 209,000 claims in the period January to March 2022, compared to 2019, and account for 62% of total money claims in the most recent quarter. This is a return to historical levels following the previously noted significant decline, with this category making up 68% of total money claims in January to March 2019. When compared to the same quarter in the previous year, the next claim band (above £1,000 up to and including £3,000) was initially similarly affected but has now returned to around historic levels with 78,000 claims. As a result, this value bracket made up 23% of total money claims in the most recent quarter, similar to its share in January to March 2019 (20%).

Other than Q2 2020, damages claims have fluctuated between 30,000 and 40,000 claims each quarter over the last five years (since January to March 2017). However, more recently volumes were down 22% to 26,000 in January to March 2022 compared to the same period in 2019. This was driven by falls in personal injury claims, down 39% from 30,000 to 18,000; other than Q2 2020, this is at its lowest level since quarter 2 of 2009 (when there were 13,000 claims). That fall was partially offset by increases in other damages claims, up 150% compared to the same period in 2019 (from 3,000 to 7,500). The increase in other damages claims is a result of PPI-related claims that rely on a section of the Consumer Credit Act that relates to unfair relationships and follows a series of court rulings on the same matter.

4.1 Allocations (table 1.3)

In January to March 2022, 38,000 money and damages claims were allocated to track, down 22% (from 49,000) on the same period in 2019. A decrease was seen across all tracks. Compared to January to March 2019, of these allocations:

• 25,000 were allocated to small claims, down 9% on January to March 2019. This accounts for 67% of all allocations (compared to 57% of all allocations in the same quarter of 2019);
• 10,000 were allocated to fast track, down 41% on January to March 2019. This accounts for 27% of all allocations (compared to 36% of all allocations in the same quarter of 2019);
• 2,300 were allocated to multi-track, down 34% on January to March 2019. This accounts for 6% of all allocations (compared to 7% of all allocations in the same quarter of 2019);

---

5. Defences (including legal representation) and Trials

---

The number of claims defended was down 10% to 66,000 compared to the same quarter in 2019.

Of those claims defended, 53% had legal representation for both claimant and defendant, 28% had representation for claimant only, and 3% for defendant only.

The number of trials was down 14% to 13,000 compared to the same quarter in 2019.

Average time taken for small claims was 51.4 weeks (14.5 weeks longer compared to the same quarter in 2019) and for multi and fast track claims it was 73.0 weeks (14.5 weeks longer than January to March in 2019).

---

Of those claims defended in January to March 2022, 53% had legal representation for both claimant and defendant, 28% had representation for claimant only, and 3% for defendant only. Almost all (95%) damages claim defences had legal representation for both the defendant and claimant, compared with 34% of money claim defences.

Figure 3: Proportion of civil defences and legal representation status, January to March 2022 (Source: table 1.6)

The total number of claims defended was down 10% in January to March 2022 compared to the same quarter in 2019, from 73,000 to 66,000 cases. This was driven by decreases across all claim types, with the most significant impact from defended damages claims (down 16% from 25,000 to 21,000). However, it should be noted that this is less than the fall in money claims issued (down 22%).

5.1 Trials and Time Taken to Reach Trial (table 1.5)

Defended cases which are not settled or withdrawn, generally result in a trial. In total, there were 13,000 trials in January to March 2022, down 14% compared to the same period in 2019. Of the claims that went to trial, 9,600 (71%) were small claims trials (down 13% compared to the same quarter in 2019) and 3,800 (29%) were fast and multi-track trials (down 18% from the same quarter of 2019).

Figure 4: Average number of weeks from claim being issued to initial hearing date, Q1 (January to March) 2017 to Q1 (January to March) 2022 (Source: table 1.5)

In January to March 2022, it took an average of 51.4 weeks between a small claim being issued and the claim going to trial, 14.5 weeks longer than the same period in 2019.

Small Claims were impacted sooner by Covid-19 than Fast and Multitrack claims, in terms of timeliness, for a number of reasons. These claims have shorter timeframes to begin with, and so delays were observed sooner in the timeliness figures. Small claims may also be less suited to remote hearings as they tend to be in person claims rather than professional users.

Measures were put in place in response to the challenges of the pandemic to help with the increasing timeliness to resolve small claims including the increased use of Small Claims Mediation and Early Neutral Evaluation (where a judge will try and engineer agreement without any finding on the fact). These measures, when successful, result in outcomes which are not used within the timeliness calculations. This means the final cases used in timeliness measures include a disproportionate number of more complex cases which take longer to dispose of.

For multi/fast track claims, it took on average 73.0 weeks to reach a trial, 14.5 weeks longer than in January to March 2019 – continuing to exceed the upper limit of the range 2009-2019 (52 to 62 weeks).

Covid-19 and associated actions have led to an uptick in time taken for all claims to reach trial. Prior to this, a sustained period of increasing receipts had increased the time taken to hear civil cases and caused delays to case progress. Additional venues have been provided to add temporary capacity to hear cases and help the court and tribunal system to run effectively.

---

6. Judgments

---

Judgments were down 37% compared to same quarter in 2019

There were 229,000 judgments made in January to March 2022, compared to 363,000 in the same quarter of 2019. Of these judgments, 207,000 (90%) were default judgments.

---

Figure 5: All claims, judgments and default judgments, Q1 (January to March) 2017 to Q1 (January to March) 2022 (Source: tables 1.2 and 1.4)

There were 229,000 judgments made in January to March 2022, down 37% compared to the same quarter of 2019. Of these, 90% were default judgments, up 1pp on its share in January to March 2019.

The second largest type of judgment was ‘admissions’^{[footnote 6]}, of which there were 13,000 in January to March 2022, down 43% on the same quarter in 2019 (from 23,000). ‘Admission’ judgments accounted for 6% of all judgments.

---

7. Warrants and Enforcements

---

Warrants issued were down 27% when compared to same quarter in 2019

In January to March 2022, 70,000 warrants were issued, down 27% from 96,000 in the same quarter of 2019. Of these, 61,000 (86%) were warrants of control, down 19% compared to the same period in 2019.

Enforcement applications were down 45% and enforcement orders were down 45% when compared to January to March 2019

All application categories were down on January to March 2019. Attachment of earnings (AoE) applications were down 50% (from 15,000 to 7,300), while AoE orders were down 54% (from 8,900 to 4,000).

---

Figure 6: Warrants and enforcements issued – Q1 (January to March) 2017 to Q1 (January to March) 2022 (Source: tables 1.7 and 1.8)

7.1 Warrants (table 1.7)

In the latest quarter (January to March 2022) there were 70,000 warrants issued, down 27% (from 96,000) on the same quarter in 2019. All warrant types have decreased over this period with warrants of control, which account for 86% of total warrants, down 19%, from 75,000 to 61,000, compared to the same period in 2019.

There were 9,300 possession warrants issued in January to March 2022, down 56% (from 21,000) on the same quarter in 2019. However, these have continued a general upwards trend since Q3 2020, following a sharp drop in Q2 2020 due to the impact of Covid-19.

7.2 Enforcements (table 1.8)

In January to March 2022, there were 13,000 enforcement-related order applications (which include attachment of earnings orders, charging orders, third party debt orders, administration orders, and orders to obtain information), down 45% compared to the same quarter of 2019. All application types were down, in particular, attachment of earnings (AoE) applications were down 50% (from 15,000 to 7,300).

There were 10,000 enforcement-related orders made in January to March 2022, down 45% compared to the same quarter of 2019. Orders fell across all types, with the decrease driven by AoE orders, which were down 54% (from 8,900 to 4,000).

Over the longer term, there has been a decreasing trend in enforcement-related applications received and orders made since 2009, possibly due to claimants’ preference for using warrants instead to retrieve money, property or goods.

---

8. Judicial reviews^{[footnote 7]},^{[footnote 8]}

---

There were 550 judicial review applications received in Q1 2022, down 9% on Q1 2021 (610) and down 40% on Q1 2019 (from 930) as a pre-Covid19 baseline.

Of the 550 applications received in Q1 2022, 23% have already closed, and 10 were found to be ‘Totally Without Merit’ (7% of cases that reached the permission stage).

---

Figure 7: Judicial Review Applications, by type; Q1 2015 to Q1 2022 (Source: JR CSV)

Quarterly JR Receipts – January to March 2022:

Of the 550 applications received in Q1 2022, 180 were civil immigration and asylum applications, 340 were civil (other), and 43 were criminal, down 29%, up 2% and up 26% respectively on Q1 2021. 7 of the civil immigration and asylum cases have since been transferred to the UTIAC.

Of the applications that were made in Q1 2022, 23% are now closed. Of the total applications, 150 reached the permission stage in Q1 2022, and of these:

• 7% (10) were found to be totally without merit (TWM).
• 48 cases were granted permission to proceed and 93 were refused at the permission stage. However, 2 of the cases refused at permission stage went on to be granted permission at the renewal stage.
• 50 cases have been assessed to be eligible for a final hearing and of these, 0 have since been heard.
• the mean time from a case being lodged to the permission decision was 38 days. Timeliness for cases being lodged to final hearing is not included for the latest quarter as this would be based on too few cases to be meaningful.

8.1 Applications lodged against departments (table 2.5)

This quarter’s tables include judicial review figures by defendant type (i.e. individual government department or public body) – table 2.5. This table provides the number of judicial review applications lodged, permission granted to proceed to final hearing, and decisions found in favour of the claimant at final hearing.

The information presented is derived from the ‘defendant name’ – a free text field completed by the claimant, which is automatically matched and grouped by department. All efforts have been made to quality assure the data presented. However, this is a manually typed field, and as such is open to inputting errors and should be used with caution.

The key findings for Q1 2022 are:

• Local Authorities had the largest number of JR applications lodged against them, with 159 applications. Of these, 20 were granted permission to proceed to final hearing (13% of applications) to date.
• The second largest recipient of JR cases was the Home Office, with 156 cases received, of which to date 18 were granted permission to proceed to final hearing (12% of applications).
• The third largest recipient was Ministry of Justice, having 110 applications lodged against it. Of these, 5 were granted permission to proceed to final hearing (5% of applications) to date.

A more granular view of the JR data by department and case type can be found in the newly developed data visualisation tool found here. Feedback is welcome on this tool to ensure it meets user needs.

---

9. Royal Courts of Justice

---

Annual court activity statistics for the various appeal courts that are administered by HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) - key findings covering the year to 2021 are summarised below:

---

The Court of Appeal Criminal Division saw a 26% increase over the year in the number of applications received, from 3,100 in 2020 to 3,900 in 2021. Increases were recorded across all three appeal application types (conviction, sentence and other^{[footnote 9]} appeal applications, up 22%, 23% and 81% respectively). However, figures are still below pre-Covid19 levels, with the total number of applications received 14% lower than in 2019. Compared to 2019, conviction and sentence applications decreased by 19% and 16% respectively, whereas other applications increased by 41%. (Table 2.1)

Court of Appeal Civil Division had 530 appeals filed in 2021, down 27% on 2020, and the lowest since 2003 when reporting began. Of the appeals filed in 2021, the largest number (140 appeals) came from the Chancery, Tax and Chancery (a quarter of all appeals filed). Similarly, the number of disposals in 2021 was also the lowest since 2003, and decreased by 27% to 560, when compared to 2020, with Chancery, Tax and Chancery cases making up the largest category (140 cases, 25% of all disposals). (Table 2.3)

Civil Division Timeliness showed a decrease in average time taken for Permission to Appeal (PTA) decisions. Mean time taken from “Notice Filed” to PTA decision has decreased by 17% to 20 weeks. (Table 2.4)

Chancery Division: Proceedings started decreased by 2% compared to last year, to 11,000. Within the London Chancery Division, total proceedings have decreased by 2%, from 3,800 to 3,700. (Table 3.1)

The High Court – The Queen’s Bench - had 4,600 proceedings started in 2021, an increase of 102% compared to 2020, returning to pre-Covid19 levels. Of these proceedings, the most common types in 2021 were for “personal injury actions”, “clinical negligence” and “other negligence”, which made up 24%, 20% and 19% of all proceedings respectively. (Table 4.2)

Commercial Court claims have reversed their long-term downward trend seen since 2011. However, compared to 2020, claims decreased again this year by 12% (to 770 claims). This is down 42% from the peak of 1,330 seen in 2011, but up 61% from the low of 480 in 2019. The largest category of claim remains “General commercial contracts and arrangements, including agency agreements”, with 200 such claims issued in 2021. (Table 5.4)

Days sat by Judge^{[footnote 10]} - there were 330,000 days sat by judges in 2021, up from 277,000 (an increase of 19%) in 2020. This is the highest number of days sat in the recorded series. Across the covered court types, this was driven by an increase in Crown Court sitting days which increased by 44% over the year (from 70,000 to 100,000 sitting days), recovering from the impact Covid-19 had on the Crown Court noted in last year’s bulletin. However, as the courts are still recovering from Covid-19, backlogs remain in most jurisdictions.

Extra funding was given in the financial year of 2021/22 to support this recovery and is reflected in the record levels of days sat.

The Court of Appeal Civil Division saw the largest increase in sitting days, increasing by 49% from 2,000 in 2020 to 3,100 in 2021. In contrast, the Queen’s Bench Division is the only court type whose days sat decreased this year; days sat decreased by 28% from 2,700 in 2020 to 2,000 in 2021. This is possibly due to the high number of High Court Judge sittings in the Crown Court, as most of these would have been sat by Queen’s Bench judges.

Circuit judges continue to make up the largest proportion of days sat (35% of all days sat in 2021). Deputy circuit judges and Recorders days sat both increased by 133% compared to 2020 (to 2,400 and 38,000 respectively). The increase we have seen in Recorder numbers is due to Recorders and Deputy District Judges being asked to sit more days in response to the pandemic.

All regions’ days sat increased in 2021, except for the category ‘Elsewhere – Bulk centre’ which decreased by 15%. London’s days sat increased the most this year, from 46,000 to 60,000 (an increase of 32%).

For further information on these summarised figures or on the statistics available in relation to the appeals courts’, please see the accompanying tables; ‘Royal Courts of Justice, 2021’.

---

10. Further information

---

10.1 Provisional data and revisions

The statistics in the latest quarter are provisional and revisions may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. If revisions are needed in subsequent quarters, these will be annotated in the tables.

10.2 Accompanying files

As well as this bulletin, the following products are published as part of this release:

• A supporting document providing further information on how the data is collected and processed, as well as information on the revisions policy and legislation relevant to civil justice.
• The quality statement published with this guide sets out our policies for producing quality statistical outputs for the information we provide to maintain our users’ understanding and trust.
• A set of overview tables (also available in accessible format) and CSV files, covering each section of this bulletin.
• A set of tables providing statistics on the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, also available in accessible format.
• A JR data visualisation tool (to provide a more granular view of the JR data by department and case type). This can be found here.

10.3 Rounding convention

Figures greater than 10,000 are rounded to the nearest 1,000, those between 1,000 and 10,000 are rounded to the nearest 100 and those between 100 to 1,000 are rounded to the nearest 10. Less than 100 are given as the actual number.

10.4 National Statistics status

National Statistics status means that official statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value.

All official statistics should comply with all aspects of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are awarded National Statistics status following an assessment by the Authority’s regulatory arm. The Authority considers whether the statistics meet the highest standards of Code compliance, including the value they add to public decisions and debate.

It is the Ministry of Justice’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the standards expected for National Statistics. If we become concerned about whether these statistics are still meeting the appropriate standards, we will discuss any concerns with the Authority promptly. National Statistics status can be removed at any point when the highest standards are not maintained, and reinstated when standards are restored.

10.5 Future publications

Our statisticians regularly review the content of publications. Development of new and improved statistical outputs is usually dependent on reallocating existing resources. As part of our continual review and prioritisation, we welcome user feedback on existing outputs including content, breadth, frequency and methodology. Please send any comments you have on this publication including suggestions for further developments or reductions in content.

10.6 Contacts

Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) press office:

Sebastian Walters - email: sebastian.walters@justice.gov.uk

Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Data and Evidence as a Service division of the Ministry of Justice:

Laura Jones - email: cajs@justice.gov.uk

Next update: 1 September 2022

1. To align with new terminology within MoJ, specified money claims are now referred to as “Money Claims” and unspecified money claims are now referred to as “Damages Claims”. ↩

2. Following the alignment of the fees for online and paper civil money and possession claims in May 2021, figure 2 shows all data with the updated claim brackets for comparison, a further breakdown of these brackets is available within the CSV. The CSV shows updated claim brackets from 2021. ↩

3. Judgment by admission is where the defendant admits the truth of the claim made. ↩

4. The judicial review data are Official Statistics ↩

5. Quarterly judicial review figures have been added to the bulletin this quarter for a more granular breakdown of this data. These figures are available in the accompanying CSV for judicial reviews and will be added to the main tables from Q1 2022. ↩

6. See footnote on the Royal Courts of Justice table 2.1 for the full list of other receipt applications. ↩

7. These figures represent only the days sat in court or in chambers in the following jurisdictions: Court of Appeal (Criminal and Civil), High Court (Chancery Division, Queen’s Bench Division, Family Division, Technology and Construction Court), Crown Court and County Court (including Family Law). Judges sit in other areas (including High Court hearings in regional County Courts) and also undertake a range of other functions outside the courtroom that are not included here. ↩