Justice Committee Backs Jury Trial Reform U-Turn but Warns Magistrates’ Courts Face Capacity Test

What did the Government agree?

The Government has confirmed that it intends to table an amendment during the Commons Report stage to remove the proposed Crown Court Bench Division provisions from the Courts and Tribunals Bill.

The Bench Division proposals would have allowed judge-only trials for certain less serious cases in the Crown Court. The Government said it had considered the evidence and representations made following the Justice Committee’s scrutiny and had decided that parliamentary scrutiny should have a meaningful impact on legislation.

The decision follows the Committee’s concerns about the evidential basis for the expected time savings from judge-only trials. The Government nevertheless maintains that the remaining reforms, combined with investment and measures to improve court efficiency, can free sufficient Crown Court capacity to reduce the outstanding caseload.

“Where concerns are raised, it is right that Government listens and responds.”

The Justice Committee welcomed the Government’s decision, but its Chair, Catherine Atkinson MP, stressed that the remaining measures will have a significant effect on criminal justice in England and Wales and must be supported by sufficient court capacity.

Why is magistrates’ court capacity a concern?

The Justice Committee’s central concern is whether the magistrates’ courts will be able to cope with the additional cases that could remain at that level as a result of the reforms.

In its earlier scrutiny, the Committee said it was not convinced that the magistrates’ courts would have sufficient capacity and warned that significant additional support would be required. MPs also questioned the Government’s ambition to increase the magistracy to 21,000 by 2029, pointing to previous recruitment campaigns that had fallen short and continuing difficulties with retention and legal-adviser capacity.

The Government has rejected the suggestion that the target is unrealistic. In its response, the Ministry of Justice said it is currently on track to reach 21,000 magistrates by 2028–29.

The Justice Committee nevertheless says Ministers must demonstrate in greater detail how the expansion of magistrates’ court capacity will meet demand, particularly because backlogs are already increasing before the reforms take effect.

What is happening with magistrate recruitment?

The Government says 655 magistrate appointments were made between April and June 2026, compared with 384 during the same period in 2025 and 215 in 2024.

It also plans to publish magistrate recruitment figures quarterly. The Government said it was planning to begin regular publication from October 2026, allowing progress towards the 21,000 target to be monitored more closely.

For the District Bench, recruitment launched in March 2026 for up to 30 new District Judges (MC), who are expected to begin sitting during the second half of 2027. The Government also says recruitment planning is based on supply-and-demand modelling and is reviewed regularly.

Legal advisers remain another important part of the capacity question. HMCTS currently employs more than 1,200 legal advisers, and the Government says it plans to recruit at least 100 trainee legal advisers each year for the next three years. It recruited 108 in 2025/26.

However, the Government acknowledges that retention of qualified legal advisers remains a risk. Measures include increased allowances, additional senior legal roles, improved progression opportunities and a new Grade 7 Senior Legal Adviser role.

What does the response say about legal aid?

Legal aid remains one of the areas where the Justice Committee says greater clarity is required.

The Committee had warned that increasing magistrates’ court sentencing powers could result in more defendants facing criminal proceedings without legal representation. It asked the Government to clarify whether criminal legal-aid eligibility thresholds would be changed before the Bill becomes law.

The Government says it will shortly publish its response to Lord Leveson’s report, including the recommendation concerning increases to the upper and lower thresholds in the magistrates’ court. It also says that, under the current financial eligibility rules, it remains confident that the majority of defendants charged with either-way offences will qualify for legal aid at the magistrates’ court.

The Government has also acknowledged the wider issue of litigants in person. It says it will examine existing support arrangements and consider additional options, while reviewing the guidance, legal support and legal-aid provision available at both trial and appeal stages under the proposed reforms.

Separate funding measures are already being introduced. The Government says an additional £116 million is being made available each year for criminal defence solicitors through increases to a range of legal-aid fees, while up to £34 million of additional annual funding has been announced for criminal legal-aid advocates.

For solicitors advising defendants, the precise effect of any future changes to financial eligibility thresholds will therefore remain an important issue as the Bill progresses.

What will change for magistrates’ court appeals?

The Government has rejected the Committee’s recommendation to delay changes to the magistrates’ court appeals process. It argues that reform is necessary because the wider measures are expected to retain more cases in magistrates’ courts and could therefore increase the number of appeals reaching the Crown Court.

The proposed system will introduce a permission stage intended to filter out appeals that have no merit at an earlier stage. The Government says the reforms are designed to ensure that appeals focus on identified errors rather than providing a second opportunity to obtain a different verdict.

However, the Government has accepted one important safeguard proposed by the Committee: audio recording must be fully operational across magistrates’ courts before the new appeals measures commence.

Plans include the procurement and rollout of recording devices, storage arrangements, an audio-only solution and integration with the Common Platform. The Government says around £27 million has been allocated over the next three years to support the technology required to provide recordings in magistrates’ courts.

The Government does not intend to require magistrates to produce detailed written judgments for every decision. Instead, it considers the existing approach to reasons sufficient, provided they allow the affected person to understand why they have won or lost and whether a decision may be open to challenge.

What is the position on judicial diversity?

The Justice Committee also raised concerns about judicial diversity, including the continued low representation of Black judges in the Crown Court.

The Government agrees that further progress is needed towards a judiciary that better reflects the communities it serves. It describes the lack of improvement in the representation of Black judges as particularly stark.

However, the Government has not accepted the Committee’s recommendation for a single national target to achieve a representative judiciary and magistracy by 2035. Instead, it points to a new Judicial and Legal Diversity Board, jointly chaired by the Lord Chancellor and Lady Chief Justice, which will develop an outcomes framework and milestones addressing persistent under-representation.

The Government also reported progress among recent magistrate recruits. In 2025/26, 17% of new appointees were from ethnic minority backgrounds, compared with 14% of magistrates already in post. It also said 36% of new recruits were under 50, compared with 19% of the existing magistracy.

Nevertheless, the Government acknowledged that more needs to be done, particularly in relation to socio-economic diversity and other underrepresented groups.

What does this mean for solicitors?

The Government response leaves solicitors with a mixed picture as the Courts and Tribunals Bill moves forward.

The removal of the proposed Crown Court Bench Division is a significant change to the original jury-trial reform package and follows sustained parliamentary scrutiny. However, the wider reforms will continue to place greater emphasis on the magistrates’ courts, making judicial, legal-adviser and administrative capacity critical to their implementation.

For criminal defence solicitors, legal aid will remain an important area to watch. The Government has not yet finalised its position on future financial eligibility thresholds, although it says it is considering the implications of the reforms and will respond to Lord Leveson’s recommendations.

The appeals reforms also have practical implications. Once implemented, the new process is expected to place greater emphasis on identifying specific errors in magistrates’ court proceedings, while the introduction of audio recording should provide an evidential record to support appeals.

Ultimately, the Justice Committee’s warning is that legislative reform cannot succeed without sufficient operational capacity. The Government has set out recruitment, technology and funding measures, but the Committee wants Ministers to demonstrate that those measures will be capable of meeting actual demand as the reforms take effect.