Key Facts

• New clause 10 proposes publicly funded legal representation for bereaved individuals involved in inquests against public bodies.
• New clause 11 seeks to remove the means test for legal aid applications prior to inquest hearings.
• New clause 12 aims to align the definition of 'family' under LASPO with that used in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
• Amendment 73 seeks to require coroner consent before deciding on an inquest without a hearing.
• Clause 38 allows coroners flexibility to hold non-contentious cases without hearings.
• The vast majority of the 30,000 inquests heard each year are held with only the coroner and their officer present.
• New clause 10 would expand access to legal aid at inquests but is opposed by the government due to potential unintended consequences.
• The Chief Coroner has been engaged for training on sympathetic approaches for bereaved families.
• A protocol supports an inquisitorial approach, considering the number of lawyers instructed when state representation is involved.
• Legal services regulators published a toolkit and competences for practitioners on 13 September.
• Advice and assistance under legal aid scheme are available to prepare for inquests.
• Exceptional case funding criteria may be met for legal representation at an inquest.
• Around 30,000 inquests are held annually in England and Wales.
• Cases can be non-contentious with the family content not to attend.
• Coroners must hold full public hearings where necessary.
• The Chief Coroner will provide guidance on determining when hearings are unnecessary.
• Amendment 75 requires families' agreement before inquests are conducted remotely.
• Amendment 76 specifies that all interested persons must consent and the coroner must be satisfied that a remote hearing is in the interests of justice.
• Amendment 79 mandates an independent review, including consultation, to assess the impact of remote inquest hearings before clause 39 can be enacted.
• Clause 39 would enable remote attendance at inquest hearings.
• Amendment 74 prevents audio-only inquests.
• Amendment 75 ensures family agreement for remote inquests.
• Amendment 77 requires reasons to be provided if an inquest hearing is held remotely.
• Amendment 78 maintains public access to remote inquest hearings.
• Amendment 79 calls for a review including consultation before clause 39 implementation.
• The amendments would ensure that consent is central to the process.
• They would guarantee coroners take full account of the character of hearings.
• There are concerns about disadvantaging individuals involved in an inquest due to proposed communication changes.
• Clause 39 aims to allow coroners the flexibility to hold remote inquest hearings.
• Remote hearings have worked well during the pandemic with interested persons and witnesses attending virtually.
• Amendment 74 proposes setting out a requirement that remote hearings must not be conducted by audio only.
• Remote access digitisation enhances access to justice for disabled individuals, older members of society, and those living in remote areas.
• Coroners have discretion to decide on the mode of conducting inquest hearings based on sensitivity towards bereaved families' concerns.
• Detailed rules will be brought forward to govern how remote hearings operate in practice.
• Amendment 75 aims to secure the agreement of all interested persons before an inquest can be conducted remotely.
• Slaughter presses amendments 75 and 79 to a vote.
• The Bar Council suggests that clause 39 should not become law without thorough research on its impact.
• Amendment requires Lord Chancellor to commission an independent review and consult before Clause 39 can be commenced.
• Remote inquest hearings are aimed at addressing the backlog caused by the pandemic.
• Current legislation mandates public coroner hearings but allows remote conduct under new rules.
• Clause 39 aims to allow pre-inquest reviews and inquest hearings to be conducted remotely.
• The clause has been introduced without sufficient research or evaluation.
• Inquest Lawyers Group reports sleeping and eating during video-linked jury sessions.
• Bereaved families may face additional distress due to remote hearing issues.
• Clause 40 ensures continuity after the Coronavirus Act 'sunsets' in March 2022.
• Section 30 of the 2020 Act was implemented to disapply the requirement that coroners conduct a jury inquest where cause is suspected to be covid-19.
• Clause 41 aims to merge coroner areas within a local authority by order of the Lord Chancellor.
• In 2010, it took 391 days on average for a case to pass through the court system.
• In 2019, it took 511 days on average for cases to be completed in Crown courts.
• Local justice areas are proposed to be abolished under clause 42 of the Bill.
• Amendment 96 aims to require Government consultation with stakeholders before abolishing local justice areas.
• The amendment proposes setting out a consultation requirement in primary legislation before abolishing local justice areas.
• Clause 42 of the Bill aims to create a more flexible and unified criminal court by removing local justice areas.
• Magistrates will still be assigned to a home court near where they live, but with flexibility to work across courts if desired.
• Clause 42 will help create a more unified and flexible court system.
• The clause removes restrictions that prevent work and magistrates from being moved easily between courts in different local justice areas.
• Minor consequential amendments to legislation are required, and these will be made by an affirmative resolution statutory instrument for Parliamentary scrutiny.
• The new courthouse on Fleet Street will significantly enhance court provision within the City of London.
• Existing courts will continue operating until the new courthouse is fully functional in 2026.
• The replacement includes both county and magistrates courts, improving overall justice system efficiency.
• The Bill extends to England and Wales only.
• One criminal court measure involves consequential amendments for Scotland and Northern Ireland.
• Online procedure rule committee measures relate to UK, England, Wales, and Scotland with variations.
• Employment tribunal measures extend to England, Wales, and Scotland.
• Responsibility for employment tribunals in Scotland will transfer to the Scottish Government following Smith Commission recommendations.