Inspection finds CTL pressures and court delays are affecting case management across CPS areas
Growing fears over custody time limit (CTL) failures are having a “detrimental impact” on prosecutorial decision-making across the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), according to a new inspection report examining how custody cases are managed nationwide. The findings come amid continuing pressure on the criminal justice system, with rising court backlogs, increasing case complexity, and record levels of defendants being held under CTLs awaiting trial.
The report, An Inspection of the Assurance Systems for Custody Time Limits by CPS Areas, found that a culture of anxiety surrounding CTL failures has encouraged excessive and defensive assurance processes across the CPS. Inspectors warned that prosecutors and legal managers had become so concerned about the consequences of CTL failures that it was affecting operational judgement and case progression decisions.
The report stated that fear surrounding failures “had a detrimental impact on prosecutorial decision-making” and contributed to a growing “assurance industry” within the CPS. Custody time limits are statutory deadlines that govern how long a defendant can remain in custody awaiting trial. In Crown Court cases, the limit is generally 182 days, while magistrates’ court cases operate under a 56-day limit.
If prosecutors fail to progress a case with sufficient “due diligence and expedition”, courts may refuse to extend the CTL, leading to defendants being released on bail. According to the inspection, CTL caseloads have risen sharply in recent years. In April 2020, there were 7,493 live CTL cases nationwide, but by January 2026 the figure had climbed to 11,411.
At the same time, CTL failures have also increased significantly. The report found there were 11 failures recorded in the year to March 2020, compared with 43 failures during the first three quarters of 2025–26 alone. Inspectors identified delays involving digital evidence, forensic material, and third-party disclosures as some of the most common risks affecting CTL compliance.
The inspection also highlighted inconsistency across CPS areas in how high-risk custody cases are reviewed and managed. Several regions had introduced their own mid-case review systems after concerns that national guidance failed to identify risks early enough. In some cases, legal managers were found to be classifying too many matters as “high risk”, diluting attention away from genuinely urgent cases.
The report concluded that the current national CTL assurance framework was “no longer fit for purpose” in today’s operational environment and called for a simpler, more consistent, and risk-led approach to custody case management. Inspectors also criticised the lack of national oversight and inconsistent guidance, warning that assurance activity had increasingly become reactive rather than strategically focused on effective case progression.