Categories
Family Law Judiciary

President of the Family Division

President of the Family Division

The President of the Family Division is a highly esteemed position in the United Kingdom’s judicial system.

It is a role responsible for overseeing and presiding over family-related cases in England and Wales. In this article, we will delve into the history of the position and provide details on the current holder. The salary of the President of the Family Division is £280,311.

History

The President of the Family Division is a judicial office in England and Wales, established in 1873 by the Judicature Act, which reformed the court system in England and Wales.

The Act created a single Supreme Court of Judicature consisting of the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal. This replaced the previously separate court systems of common law and equity, and it also established several new judicial positions, including the President of the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division.

The Family Division was created in 1971 when Admiralty and contentious probate cases were removed from its predecessor, the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division.

Selection Process for President of the Family Division

Selection for President of the Family Division is run under the relevant sections of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 as amended by the Crime and Courts Act 2013.

In accordance with section 70 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, as amended by the Crime and Courts Act 2013, a panel determined the selection process to be followed.  As required by the Crime and Courts Act 2013, the Lord Chancellor is consulted as part of the selection process.

In accordance with s.10(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the selection exercise was open to all applicants who satisfy the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 7-year basis, or are judges of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Court of Appeal, or High Court.

Current and Former Presidents of the Family Division

On the 23rd April 2026, His Majesty The King was pleased to approve the appointment of The Rt Hon Lord Justice Stephen Cobb as the President of the Family Division. This appointment follows the retirement of Sir Andrew McFarlane on 13 April 2026.

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Stephen Cobb was called to the Bar, Inner Temple, in 1985 and took Silk in 2003. He started his judicial career as a Recorder in 2004 and was authorised to hear cases under section 9(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 in 2009. He was appointed as a High Court Judge in 2013 and was assigned to the Family Division; he also sat in the Administrative Court of the Kings Bench Division and was a nominated judge of the Court of Protection. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal in June 2024, and took his place in 2025. He served as a Family Presiding Judge (North Eastern Circuit) between 2015 and 2021.

Sir Andrew McFarlane was the President of the Family Division and Head of Family Justice in England and Wales from July 2018 until his retirement on the 13th April 2026.

Sir Andrew succeeded Sir James Munby.

As well as being the President, The Rt Hon Lord Justice Stephen Cobb is the Head of the Family Division of the High Court of Justice and may sit as of right in the Court of Appeal, the High Court and the Family Court either alone or as part of a panel.

Lord Justice Stephen Cobb is also Head of Family Justice, Head of Probate, President of the Court of Protection and chairs both the Family Procedure Rule Committee and Family Justice Council.

The Family Division of the High Court consists of 19 High Court Judges. It deals with:

  • Divorce, including disputes over children, property or money;
  • Adoption, wardship and other matters involving children; and
  • Judgments on behalf of those who are unable to make decisions for themselves, such as persistent vegetative state victims.

The Family Division also deals with undisputed matters of probate – the legal recognition of the validity of a will – in the Probate Registry of the Family Division in London, and the 11 probate registries in England and Wales.

Image of the Rt Hon Lord Justice Stephen Cobb : Photoshot

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Police

Is Crimestoppers Anonymous ?

Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers is widely promoted as the United Kingdom’s leading provider of anonymous crime reporting. The charity asserts on its website that individuals who submit information, whether online or by telephone, benefit from “100% anonymity”.

Your anonymity is 100% guaranteed. We are not interested in who you are, only what you know, so the more detail you give us the better. 

Your computer and mobile phone IP addresses cannot be tracked or saved. It’s completely anonymous

Crimestoppers – Give information anonymously

However, questions have been raised about whether this assurance is fully justified.

An independent investigator and YouTuber known as Crimebodge has conducted a detailed examination of these claims.

In a video released on the 21st April 2026, titled I Tested Crimestoppers’ ‘100% Anonymity’ – They FAILED, he systematically tests the service’s safeguards and identifies several technical and procedural shortcomings that may leave users of Crimestoppers less protected than they have been led to believe.

I Tested Crimestoppers’ “100% Anonymity” – They FAILED

Crimestoppers Online Reporting System

Approximately 80 percent of reports to Crimestoppers are now submitted via its website. While the platform states that it masks IP addresses and does not retain personal data, the investigation reveals a more complex picture.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

How to report a crime – Police.uk

Analysis of the site shows that it activates 16 third-party trackers before a report is even submitted. These include services from Google, Meta (Facebook), LinkedIn, Snapchat, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), Stack Adapt, and Hotjar. Data collected can include:

  • IP addresses
  • Geolocation information
  • Browser fingerprints
  • User interaction patterns (such as mouse movements and keystrokes)

The Hotjar tool, in particular, is capable of recording complete user sessions, including content typed into forms. Social media login options further increase the risk of linking activity to identifiable profiles. Notably, privacy notices and cookie consent mechanisms frequently load after many of these trackers have already activated.

The website is also protected by Imperva, a service whose administrators have potential access to raw server logs, including IP data. As a result, the online portal may not offer the level of anonymity that is publicly advertised.

Crimestoppers Telephone Reporting

Crimestoppers maintains that telephone calls are not recorded and that caller numbers are withheld. Nevertheless, several practical vulnerabilities remain:

  • Telecommunications providers routinely retain call metadata, which can be accessed by law enforcement.
  • The use of 141 to withhold caller ID is widely known and may itself attract attention.
  • The 1471 service can often reveal the last caller on landlines.
  • In cases involving serious allegations or potential misuse, police have confirmed they will not always uphold anonymity.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

If you’re concerned your call could be traced, dial 141 before 0800 555 111, this will block your phone number. 

How to report a crime – Police.uk

The organisation’s policy also reserves the right to assist police in identifying individuals who submit reports deemed to be malicious which is a definition that allows considerable discretion.

Effectiveness and Value of Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers’ own published figures, referenced in the investigation, indicate limited outcomes:

  • 75 percent of all reports are discarded without any police follow-up.
  • Only one in nine reports passed to police results in a tangible outcome.

These statistics suggest that a significant proportion of individuals who submit information may be exposing themselves to potential identification for little discernible public benefit.

Implications of Crimestoppers Anonymity Claims

The investigation does not oppose the principle of anonymous crime reporting. Instead, it highlights the importance of accurate information regarding the actual protections in place. Members of the public who rely on Crimestoppers’ assurances may inadvertently leave digital traces that could later be traced, particularly in high-profile or contentious cases.

The video concludes by recommending that individuals educate themselves about their rights when interacting with law enforcement, rather than depending solely on official channels.

Crimebodge refers readers to his publication, Copper Stopper: How to Protect Yourself From Law Enforcement, available in both paperback and digital formats.

Conclusion

While Crimestoppers undoubtedly provides a valuable public service, its repeated emphasis on “100% anonymity” appears overly optimistic and potentially misleading.

In an environment of widespread digital surveillance and data collection, genuine anonymity demands robust technical measures, transparent limitations, and clear disclaimers.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, Police Impartiality, Police Surveillance, Are the Police for Hire ?, Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC),Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Sussex Police, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Civil Justice Criminal Justice Family Law Legal Professionals

What is a Court Legal Adviser ?

Court Legal Advisor

In magistrates’ courts across England and Wales, lay justices (magistrates who are not legally qualified), deal with the overwhelming majority of criminal cases. Magistrates’ courts handle approximately 90-95% of all criminal cases in England and Wales.

To ensure proceedings are conducted lawfully, fairly and efficiently, lay justices are supported by justices’ legal advisers (also known as court legal advisers).

Court Legal advisers are qualified lawyers, either solicitors or barristers, who provide expert assistance to the court on all matters of procedure, evidence and sentencing law.

Alternative job titles for a Court Legal advisers include Court clerk or assistant to justices’ clerk.

We are HMCTS – Legal Adviser

Statutory Basis: Section 28 of the Courts Act 2003

The fundamental legal framework for the role is provided by Section 28 of the Courts Act 2003 (Function of giving legal advice to justices of the peace).

Under Section 28(1), the Lady Chief Justice may authorise a person:

  • (a) to give advice to justices of the peace about matters of law (including procedure and practice) on questions arising in connection with the discharge of their functions, including when the adviser is not personally attending on them; and
  • (b) to bring to the attention of justices of the peace any point of law (including procedure and practice) that is or may be relevant.

Authorisation is limited to suitably qualified court staff and carries statutory protection of independence.

Core Duties in Criminal and Youth Courts

In criminal and youth courts consisting of lay justices, the detailed duties of justices’ legal advisers are set out in Rule 2.12 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025.

A justices’ legal adviser must provide the court with any legal advice it needs (whether or not the court asks for it), including advice on:

  • questions of law and mixed questions of law and fact
  • matters of practice and procedure
  • relevant judicial decisions that bind the court
  • the process to be followed to reach a decision
  • the law relating to sentencing
  • the range of penalties and orders available, taking into account any applicable sentencing guidelines
  • any other matter relevant to the case

(5) In performing the functions for which these Rules provide a justices’ legal adviser―

(a) must avoid the appearance of advocacy for a party;

(b) must adhere to the same principles that apply to courts of independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, competence, diligence and ensuring fair treatment; and

(c) may consult with other justices’ legal advisers.

Rule 2.12 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025

Key requirements include:

  • Allowing parties an opportunity to make representations on the advice given
  • Being permitted to ask questions of parties or witnesses to clarify evidence
  • Assisting the court in drafting and recording reasons for its decisions
  • Supporting unrepresented defendants
  • Maintaining strict impartiality at all times

(3) To provide the legal advice required by paragraph (2)(a) a justices’ legal adviser must―

(a) if necessary, attend the members of the court outside the courtroom; and

(b) in that event, inform the parties, if present, of any such advice given there.

Rule 2.12 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025

Advisers may not announce verdicts, sentences, or allocation/sending decisions.

Role Beyond Criminal Courts

While their primary and most extensive work is in criminal courts, justices’ legal advisers also support lay justices in family proceedings (under Family Procedure Rules Practice Direction 2C) and certain civil matters in magistrates’ courts.

However, the criminal jurisdiction remains the largest part of their caseload.

Skills and knowledge

As a Courts Legal Advisor , you’ll need:

  • legal knowledge including court procedures and government regulations
  • to be thorough and pay attention to detail
  • persistence and determination
  • analytical thinking skills
  • excellent verbal communication skills
  • the ability to think clearly using logic and reasoning
  • concentration skills
  • the ability to learn through your work
  • to be able to use a computer and the main software packages confidently

Qualifications and Employment

Justices’ legal advisers are employed by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS). Entry typically requires completion of the academic stage of solicitor or barrister qualification. Candidates may join through the two-year HMCTS trainee legal adviser programme or by direct application if already fully qualified.

Starting salaries are around £32,000, rising to £53,000 or more with experience. The role demands excellent legal knowledge, strong analytical skills, clear communication, attention to detail and the ability to remain calm and impartial under pressure.

Career path and progression

After qualifying, you’ll become as a Tier 1 legal adviser. With more experience, you can move on to be a Tier 2 adviser, working on more complex cases and with more responsibility. For instance, reviewing casework and mentoring trainees.

As your career as a legal advisor develops, and with further training, you can move up in stages to become:

  • a legal adviser team manager in a court
  • an area or regional manager
  • a justices’ clerk, if you have over 5 years’ experience
  • a barrister, crown prosecutor or judge
Dodgy Magistrates (JP)

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Magistrates, Chief Magistrate, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ?, Crown Prosecution Service, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Civil Justice Criminal Justice Family Law Law Legal Professionals

What is a Skeleton Argument ?

Skeleton Argument

A skeleton argument is a concise written document prepared by a party (or their legal representative) and submitted to the court in advance of a hearing. It summarises the key factual and legal issues in dispute, sets out the main arguments that will be advanced, and identifies the authorities (cases, statutes, or other materials) that will be relied upon.

It acts as a “roadmap” for the judge and the advocate, helping to focus oral submissions and save valuable court time. Skeleton arguments (or their equivalent, such as position statements) are now a standard feature of litigation in England and Wales.

Purpose and Benefits of a Skeleton Argument

The primary purpose of a skeleton argument is to assist the court by clearly and concisely setting out the arguments on which a party intends to rely. A well-drafted skeleton:

  • Defines and narrows the real issues in dispute
  • Allows the judge to pre-read the case efficiently
  • Provides a clear structure for oral advocacy
  • Promotes efficiency in hearings

Judges frequently read skeletons before the hearing. A strong, well-structured skeleton can significantly influence the outcome by framing the case in advance.

Skeleton arguments are generally not required in the Magistrates’ Court unless the court specifically directs for one (e.g. for a complex legal issue).

Skeleton Arguments in Civil Proceedings (CPR)

In civil cases, skeleton arguments are governed by the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) and the associated Practice Directions. The most important guidance is contained in Practice Direction 52A (Appeals), Section V, which sets out the requirements for skeleton arguments and is widely followed as best practice in first-instance hearings as well.

Key requirements include:

  • Must be concise, clear and focused
  • Set out in numbered paragraphs
  • Clearly define the areas of controversy
  • Contain cross-references to the relevant documents in the court bundle
  • Be self-contained (no incorporation by reference to earlier documents)
  • For each authority cited, state the proposition of law it supports and give specific page or paragraph references
  • Avoid lengthy quotations from cases or documents

Failure to comply with these requirements may result in costs sanctions or adverse comments from the court.

Skeleton Arguments in Criminal Proceedings (CrimPR)

In criminal cases, skeleton arguments are governed by the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR) and the Criminal Practice Directions 2023 (as amended Nov 2025).

They are commonly required in the Crown Court for contested applications, trials involving significant legal argument, complex sentence hearings, and all appeals to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).

Key requirements include:

  • Strong emphasis on brevity and clarity
  • Must clearly identify the real issues
  • Proper citation of authorities (proposition of law + pinpoint reference)
  • Must comply with any page limits or other directions set by the court
  • Must be filed and served in accordance with any timetable set by the court

Non-compliance may lead to the skeleton being rejected, costs orders, or adjournment of the hearing.

Skeleton Arguments in Family Proceedings (FPR)

In family law cases, the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR) and Practice Direction 27A (Court Bundles and Position Statements) apply. The terminology differs slightly from civil and criminal litigation.

In financial remedy proceedings, the term “position statement” is commonly used, and this includes what would otherwise be a skeleton argument. Strict page limits apply:

  • First Appointment: maximum 6 pages
  • Other interim hearings: maximum 8 pages
  • FDR appointment: maximum 12 pages
  • Final hearing: maximum 15 pages (excluding agreed documents)

In children and other non-financial family cases, a separate skeleton argument may be filed where appropriate (generally not exceeding 20 pages).

For appeals in family proceedings, see FPR PD 30A, which requires a skeleton argument to accompany or follow the appellant’s notice.

Common requirements across family cases include:

  • Numbered paragraphs
  • Cross-references to the court bundle
  • Clear propositions of law for each authority cited
  • No new evidence or factual allegations
  • Emphasis on the welfare of the child (where relevant) or the s.25 factors in financial cases

Recommended Structure for a Skeleton Argument / Position Statement

  1. Introduction – The order or relief sought and the party’s position
  2. The Issues – A clear numbered list of the matters the court must decide
  3. Factual Background – Short neutral chronology or agreed facts
  4. Legal Framework – Relevant statutes and case law
  5. Submissions – Arguments on each issue, clearly linked to the facts and law
  6. Conclusion – Summary of the relief requested

Published Skeleton Argument Templates and Examples

Several official and professional templates are publicly available:

  • Official GOV.UK Template – Form AC014 (Skeleton Argument) – ideal for appeals and tribunals
  • SRA Guidance Template
  • Many barristers’ chambers and law firms publish precedent skeletons for specific applications (e.g. summary judgment, interim injunctions, family financial remedies)

While using a template is helpful, always tailor it to the specific requirements of your court, hearing type and any individual directions from the judge.

Best Practice Tips

  • Use short sentences, clear headings, and numbered paragraphs
  • Use 12-point font with 1.5 line spacing
  • Avoid footnotes where possible
  • File and exchange by the court deadline (usually the day before the hearing)
  • Always comply with any specific directions from the judge

Comparison Table

AreaGoverning RulesDocument NameTypical LengthMandatory?
CivilCPR + PD 52A (Section V)Skeleton ArgumentConcise (often up to 25 pages on appeal)Usually yes, especially on appeals
CriminalCrimPR + Practice Directions 2023Skeleton ArgumentSubject to court directionsCommon in complex/contested cases
Family (Financial)FPR PD 27APosition Statement (incl. skeleton)6–15 pages (stage dependent)Yes for most hearings
Family (Children/Other)FPR PD 27A + PD 30APosition Statement / SkeletonUp to 20 pagesIf appropriate

Conclusion

The skeleton argument (or position statement in family cases) is an essential bridge between written statements and oral advocacy in the UK courts. Whether in civil, criminal, or family proceedings, the golden rules remain the same: clarity, brevity, and precision.

A well-crafted skeleton or position statement does not merely summarise the case, it persuades the court before a single word is spoken in the hearing.

Check out the related articles on the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Lady Chief Justice, Master of the Rolls, Lord Chancellor, Justice Secretary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Abuse of Process, Government Legal Department (GLD), What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary Legal Professionals

Can you Buy a Judge ?

His Honour Judge Martin John Cook For Sale

His Honour Judge Martin John Cook was for sale, in a box, at the Mega Car Boot Sale at Sayers Common on Sunday 29th March 2026 !

For £100 you could have his judicial gown, sash, court shoes and other memorabilia . His Honours wig had already been sold on eBay for £275.

The judges former court attire had been found in a box during a house clearance of a five million pound house in Esher, Surrey.

His Honour Judge Cook in a Box

His Honour Judge Michael John Cook was a British circuit judge (often referred to as HHJ Michael Cook or simply Judge Michael Cook) known particularly in the field of legal costs in England and Wales.

Judge Michael Cook passed the Solicitor Final Exam on the 31st July 1953

His Honour Judge Cook is more often cited as an author and commentator on costs rather than through a large volume of widely reported appellate judgments.

His Honour Judge Martin John Cook

Stringer v Copley (KT903476) on the 17th May 2002, is the most frequently cited judgment by HHJ Michael Cook in modern costs practice. Disbursements Decoded: The Breakdown Debate in Fixed Costs Litigation

Judge Cook’s holdings (widely quoted in later cases) was that Medical agency fees are recoverable between the parties provided it is demonstrated that their charges do not exceed the reasonable and proportionate cost of the work if done directly by solicitors.

Invoices/fee notes from medical agencies must distinguish between the medical expert’s fee and the agency’s own charges.

Judge Cook’s famous textbook Cook on Costs (now in updated editions dedicated to “the late Michael Cook”) frequently references his practical views, and later cases or articles quote him on topics like:

  • Sufficiency of particulars in solicitors’ bills (referenced in Ralph Hume Garry v Gwillim [2002] EWCA Civ 1500, where his views in Cook on Costs align with Cordery on Solicitors).

    In the latest edition of Cordery, written by His Hon. Judge Michael Cook, it is said that:−”A bill of costs must contain sufficient particulars to enable the client to judge the fairness of the charges.” Judge Cook says the same in his own work Cook on Costs.
  • Blackstock v Blackstock [1990] EWCA Civ J1129-9 before Lord Justice Slade and Lord Justice Butler-Sloss upheld Judge Cook’s reasoning and refusal of the ouster order.
  • Broader costs assessment principles, proportionality and remuneration.

Judge Michael Cook lived a long life in the law and passed away at the age of 93. Costs Judge Master Jennifer James wrote a tribute titled “A life in law well lived – His Honour Judge Michael Cook” in the Costs Lawyer Journal, reflecting on his contributions and the impact of his eponymous textbook.

Do Retired Judges Keep Their Title ?
Dodgy Judges
Can you Email a Judge ?

The High Court Judge that never was – His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ?, Judicial Guidance on Artificial Intelligence and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Civil Justice Law Legal Analysis

Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Dodgy Fire Sticks

Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Dodgy Fire Sticks

Norwich Pharmacal orders (NPOs) are a form of court-ordered disclosure used in England and Wales and in equivalent jurisdictions such as Ireland.

Norwich Pharmacal orders (NPOs) require a third party to provide information or documents to help identify or locate an unknown wrongdoer when that information is held by an innocent party who has become involved in the relevant wrongdoing.

Unlike standard disclosure in ongoing litigation, Norwich Pharmacal orders target non-parties who have been unwittingly “mixed up” in the misconduct. This allows claimants to pursue justice when the perpetrators hide behind anonymity online or through other means.

Norwich Pharmacal orders are widely used in digital contexts. Common applications include identifying anonymous online infringers in defamation, harassment, or copyright cases, tracing fraudsters through banks or payment providers and supporting intellectual property enforcement actions.

Origin and Legal Basis

The remedy originates from the landmark 1974 House of Lords decision in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133. In that case, the pharmaceutical company found that counterfeit versions of its patented drug were entering the United Kingdom but could not identify the importers. Customs and Excise held the import records.

The House of Lords ruled that a third party innocently involved in facilitating wrongdoing owes an equitable duty to assist the victim by disclosing relevant information, including the identity of the wrongdoer. This principle forms the basis of Norwich Pharmacal jurisdiction today.

Requirements for Obtaining an Order

To obtain a Norwich Pharmacal order, the applicant must generally satisfy the following key conditions:

  • There is a good arguable case that wrongdoing has occurred (this can include torts, breaches of contract, intellectual property infringement, or other actionable wrongs).
  • The order is necessary to enable the applicant to bring proceedings or obtain legitimate redress against the ultimate wrongdoer. Alternative routes must be unavailable or ineffective.
  • The respondent (third party) has been “mixed up” in the wrongdoing, even innocently, and is able to provide the required information.
  • The court must be satisfied that granting the order is just and proportionate, and that the application is not a mere “fishing expedition”.

Courts exercise discretion and balance the need for justice against privacy and other rights.

The Justice and Security Act 2013

Section 17 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 introduced a statutory restriction on the Norwich Pharmacal jurisdiction. It provides that a court may not make a Norwich Pharmacal order (or similar order) in civil proceedings if the disclosure sought would be damaging to the interests of national security.

The Act was enacted partly in response to cases where claimants sought disclosure of sensitive intelligence material through Norwich Pharmacal applications. It prevents the court from ordering disclosure of “sensitive information” where the Secretary of State certifies that such disclosure would damage national security.

Sky v Revolut – Dodgy Fire Sticks

On the 26th March 2026, Mr Justice Brian Cregan in the Irish High Court granted a Norwich Pharmacal order requiring Revolut Bank UAB to disclose information to Sky.

Sky sought the names and addresses of 304 subscribers and ten resellers who had made payments via Revolut for illegal streaming devices, commonly known as “Dodgy Fire Sticks” or “Dodgy boxes”.

These devices, loaded with unauthorised software, enable access to premium content including Premier League football, TNT Sports, Sky Sports, and Disney+ without legitimate subscriptions. It is said that many UK viewers access Irish-sourced illegal feeds through such devices.

The payments related to services provided by Wexford resident David Dunbar, who was previously ordered to pay Sky €480,000 in damages.

He also faces approximately €100,000 in legal costs and was fined €30,000 for contempt of court after breaching orders to preserve data.Sky confirmed that the information would be used to commence legal proceedings against the resellers and certain users.

The data is to be provided on an encrypted spreadsheet within 28 days. Revolut remained neutral on the application.

Police authorities have repeatedly warned that purchasing such devices can fund organised crime and expose users to risks of data theft and malware.

Check out our related articles on Defendant’s Costs Order, Wasted Costs Order, Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO), Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Government Law

What is a Statutory Instrument ?

Statutory Instrument - Parliament

A statutory instrument is the most common form of secondary or delegated legislation in the United Kingdom. It allows Ministers or other authorised bodies to make detailed rules, regulations, orders, or other provisions under the authority of an Act of Parliament (primary legislation), without Parliament having to pass a completely new Act for every technical or updating measure.

Primary vs Secondary Legislation

Acts of Parliament (primary legislation) set out the broad framework and principles of the law. They are fully debated and passed by both Houses of Parliament before receiving Royal Assent.

Many Acts are intentionally framework-style, leaving detailed implementation such as technical standards, fee levels, commencement dates or procedural rules to be filled in later by secondary legislation. Statutory instruments made under these powers have the full force of law, but they derive their authority from the “parent” or “enabling” Act.

Why Use Statutory Instruments?

Parliament relies on SIs for practical reasons:

  • Efficiency — Primary legislation would otherwise become overloaded with technical detail.
  • Flexibility — Governments can respond quickly to changing circumstances (for example, updating penalty levels for inflation or implementing new safety standards).
  • Volume — Between 1,500 and 2,000 SIs are typically made each year in the UK.

SIs govern a wide range of everyday matters, from traffic regulations and immigration rules to environmental standards and tax exemptions.

How Statutory Instruments Are Made

The process is straightforward and governed by the Statutory Instruments Act 1946:

  1. The parent Act grants a specific power to a Minister (or occasionally another body) to make regulations on defined matters.
  2. Government lawyers draft the SI, often following public consultation.
  3. The Minister signs (“makes”) the instrument.
  4. It is numbered in the annual series (e.g., SI 2026/123) and published on the official legislation website.

Parliamentary Scrutiny: Affirmative, Negative and Other Procedures

The level of parliamentary oversight is set by the parent Act:

  • Negative procedure (most common): The SI is laid before Parliament and comes into force automatically after 40 sitting days unless either House passes a motion to annul it (“pray against”). Successful annulments are rare.
  • Affirmative procedure: The SI (often laid in draft) must be actively approved by resolution of both Houses (or the Commons alone for certain financial matters) before it can be made or come into force.
  • No procedure (or “made negative” in some cases): Many technical or minor instruments, such as simple commencement orders, require no further parliamentary step.

All SIs that are subject to procedure are accompanied by an Explanatory Memorandum in plain English. They are scrutinised on technical grounds by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments (JCSI).

Judicial Oversight and Challenges

While Parliament provides the primary political check on SIs, the courts play an important constitutional role through judicial review. Unlike primary legislation (which cannot be struck down by the courts), secondary legislation such as statutory instruments can be declared invalid if it is found to be unlawful.

The main grounds for judicial review of an SI include:

  • Ultra vires (lack of vires / illegality): The instrument goes beyond the powers granted by the parent Act. Courts interpret enabling powers strictly, especially so-called Henry VIII clauses (powers allowing Ministers to amend or repeal primary legislation).
  • Procedural impropriety: Failure to follow mandatory consultation, laying procedures, or other rules set by the parent Act or the Statutory Instruments Act 1946.
  • Irrationality / unreasonableness: The decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable Minister could have made it (applied cautiously).
  • Uncertainty: The instrument is so unclear or vague that it cannot be understood or applied.
  • Incompatibility with Convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 (where the parent Act does not prevent removal of the incompatibility).

If a court finds an SIs unlawful, the usual remedy is a quashing order that renders the instrument void from the outset. Parliamentary approval does not prevent judicial review.

Examples of Statutory Instruments

Common examples include regulations updating driving licence rules, housing standards or environmental protections; orders setting or amending penalty levels; and commencement regulations that bring sections of a new Act into force.

In October 2013, the Treasury laid before Parliament a short statutory instrument, in relation to Sir Keir Starmer.

Officially known as The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, the measure came into force on the 31st October 2013.

Where to Find Statutory Instruments

You can browse current and historical SIs on the official UK legislation database and Parliament’s dedicated Find a Statutory Instrument website.

Further Reading

Summary

Statutory instruments are a vital and routine part of the UK legislative system. They enable detailed and responsive law-making while remaining grounded in parliamentary authority.

Although they receive less public attention than primary Acts, they constitute the bulk of the rules that affect daily life. They remain subject to both parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight to ensure they stay within lawful bounds.

Check out the related articles on the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Lady Chief Justice, Master of the Rolls, Lord Chancellor, Justice Secretary, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Government Legal Department, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Abuse of Process, Government Legal Department (GLD), What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

Sir Kier Starmer

In October 2013, the Treasury laid before Parliament a short statutory instrument, in relation to Sir Keir Starmer, that has since gained unexpected political attention.

Officially known as The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/2588), the measure came into force on the 31st October 2013.

Despite its modest length of just three operative paragraphs, the Regulations addressed a specific technical issue arising from Keir Starmer KC’s departure as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Made – – – – 8th October 2013
Laid before Parliament 9th October 2013
Coming into force – – 31st October 2013

The Treasury, in exercise of the power conferred by section 5(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act
1971(a) and now vested in them(b) hereby make the following Regulations:

Citation and commencement

  1. These Regulations may be cited as the Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, and come into force on 31st October 2013.

    Interpretation
  2. (1) In these Regulations, “the 1971 Act” means the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971.
    (2) For the purposes of these Regulations the time when a pension “begins” is that stated in
    section 8(2) of the 1971 Act(c).

    Pensions to which the 1971 Act shall apply
  3. The 1971 Act shall have effect in relation to any pension payable under the Pension Scheme
    for Keir Starmer QC (being a scheme made under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972(d)),
    as if it were a pension specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act.
The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

Background

Sir Keir Starmer, who is currently the UK Prime Minister, served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 until 2013, leading the Crown Prosecution Service through a period of major reform.

As with other senior public appointments, his remuneration included a pension arranged under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972.

This was a bespoke pension scheme created specifically for the role of DPP, separate from the standard civil service pension arrangements. When Keir Starmer left office, a question arose regarding how his pension would be increased for inflation once it came into payment.

Purpose of The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013

The 2013 Regulations were made under section 5(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971. They declared that the 1971 Act “shall have effect” in relation to any pension payable under Keir Starmer’s scheme “as if it were a pension specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2” to that Act.

In simple terms, this ensured that Kier Starmer’s DPP pension would receive the same annual up-rating for inflation as most other public-service pensions. Increases would therefore be linked to the Retail Prices Index (or its successor measures), thereby protecting the pension’s real value over time.

Key Provisions and Scrutiny

Signed by Treasury ministers Desmond Swayne and Stephen Crabb on the 8th October 2013, the instrument was laid before Parliament the next day.

An accompanying explanatory note emphasised its narrow scope, stating that it had “no impact upon the private or voluntary sectors”. A parliamentary joint committee scrutinising statutory instruments noted a minor drafting point concerning the definition of when a pension “begins”. However, the committee accepted the Treasury’s clarification and viewed the Regulations as largely technical in nature.

The underlying pension scheme was tax-unregistered, a common feature for certain high-level public posts at the time. The 2013 Regulations did not create or change this tax status; they simply applied standard indexation rules.

Later Controversy

For nearly a decade, the Regulations attracted little public interest. They resurfaced in March 2023 during debates over the abolition of the lifetime allowance. Some critics portrayed the measure as a “special law” granting Kier Starmer, by then Leader of the Opposition, a personal tax advantage.

Supporters argued that the arrangement was standard practice for the DPP post and that the Regulations merely aligned indexation with other comparable public-sector schemes. Keir Starmer has described the pension as the normal entitlement for the office he held.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of hypocrisy by Conservatives over a tax exempt pension deal he has from a previous job.

Sir Keir criticised measures in the Budget which scrapped the £1m cap on lifetime pensions savings.

The Telegraph reported that Sir Keir got a special “tax unregistered” pension scheme when he stood down as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in 2013.

Labour says it was standard practice for retiring DPPs to get such a deal.

But senior Conservative MP Sir Iain Duncan Smith told The Telegraph it made a “mockery” of Labour’s position on the lifetime pension allowance, and was as “close to hypocrisy as it is possible to get”.

Sir Keir Starmer criticised over tax free pension scheme

Image of The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP – xAI – Grok

Check out our related articles on Statutory Instruments, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Rule of Law, Crown Prosecution Service, Open Justice, What is Law, Is the Law Black and White ?, Branches of Law, Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination at the Bar, The Secret Barrister, Barristers, Direct Access Barrister, Barristers Behaving Badly, Inns of Court, Council of the Inns of Court, Bar Standards Board, Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Services, Bar Council, Innocent until Proven Guilty and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary

First-tier Tribunal Judge Linda Veloso

Judge Linda Veloso

Judge Linda Veloso is a sitting judge in the United Kingdom’s tribunal system, specifically serving in the First-tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber.

Judge Veloso has gained public attention in recent years due to high-profile decisions in immigration and deportation cases, including one that drew widespread media coverage in March 2026.

Judge Veloso is shown on the First-tier Tribunal Judges published on the Courts and Tribunal Judiciary website.

Judge Veloso Legal Bio

Linda Veloso was called to the Bar by Lincoln’s Inn in 1996, marking the start of her legal career as a barrister. She accumulated significant experience in legal practice before transitioning into judicial roles.

In 2013, she was appointed as a fee-paid (part-time) judge in the First-tier Tribunal’s Social Entitlement Chamber, where she handled cases related to social security, disability benefits, and other welfare matters.

On November 25th 2019, the UK judiciary announced her full appointment as a Judge of the First-tier Tribunal, assigned to the Immigration and Asylum Chamber effective December 6th 2019.

Linda Veloso has been appointed as a Judge of the First-tier Tribunal on the advice of the Senior President of Tribunals, the Right Honourable Sir Ernest Ryder.

The Senior President of Tribunals has assigned her to the Immigration and Asylum Chamber with effect from 6th December 2019.

Linda Veloso, aged 47, will continue to be known as Judge Veloso. She was called to the Bar (L) in 1996. She was appointed as a fee-paid Judge of the First-tier Tribunal in the Social Entitlement Chamber in 2013.

Appointment as a Judge of the First Tier Tribunal, Immigration and Asylum Chamber: Veloso
Judge VelosoImmigration & Asylum
List of First Tier Tribunal Judges

At the time of her appointment, she was 47 years old and continued to be addressed as Judge Veloso.

This role involves adjudicating appeals against Home Office decisions on immigration, asylum, deportation, and human rights claims.

Judge Veloso career progression reflects a common path for many UK tribunal judges: starting with fee-paid judicial experience in one chamber before moving to a salaried position in a specialised area like immigration law.

Notable Case: The 2026 “Chicken Nugget” Ruling

Judge Veloso came under significant public and media scrutiny in March 2026 for her decision in the protracted deportation appeal of Klevis Disha, an Albanian national who had been in the UK since around 2001.

Disha, who had a criminal conviction and faced deportation, contended that his removal would breach his and his family’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to respect for private and family life).

The case focused heavily on Disha’s 11-year-old son (referred to as “C” in court documents), who has complex behavioural issues, sensory processing difficulties, a restricted diet, and struggles with certain food textures.

Evidence indicated that C had lived his entire life in the UK, received specialised support from his school, and was making progress in a “delicate ongoing process”.

The child reportedly did not speak or understand Albanian and had no familiarity with Albania.The Home Office opposed the appeal, including assertions that C spoke Albanian as a first language and lacked a formal autism diagnosis. Judge Veloso rejected several of these claims and ruled in Disha’s favour.

In her determination, she concluded that it was in the child’s best interests to remain in the UK with his family, where he could continue to receive established support.

She stressed that uprooting him would be unduly harsh, given his needs and the fact that the UK was the only country he had ever known. The ruling invoked Article 8 and placed the child’s welfare as a primary consideration.

The decision provoked considerable controversy and media headlines referring to the “chicken nugget migrant” case, arising from earlier arguments about the child’s limited food preferences (including UK-specific chicken nuggets) not being available abroad.

Several news outlets such as The Sun, GB News, and the Evening Standard covered the outcome, with some commentators criticising it as an illustration of human rights law hindering deportations. The Home Office stated that it was actively considering the judgment.

The full judgment in the case of Klevis Disha v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appeal Number: HU/60457/2023), decided by First-tier Tribunal Judge L Veloso and promulgated around March 2026 (hearing on 26th February 2026, signed 12th March 2026, published 17th March 2026), is publicly available on the official UK Judiciary website.

The three key values which are central to the role of judicial office holders (JOHs) in England and Wales are:
• Independence
• Impartiality
• Integrity

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Image of First Tier Tribunal Judge Veloso : xAI – Grok

Check out our articles on Dodgy Judges, Judges Salaries and Fees, Mr Justice Williams, His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC, His Honour Judge Richardson, His Honour Now His Dishonour, His Honour Judge Michael Slater, His Honour Judge Martin Davis, HHJ Farquhar, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Criminal Justice Government Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is the head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The Director of Public Prosecutions is responsible for the independent prosecution of criminal cases investigated by the police and other agencies.

This role ensures that decisions to prosecute are taken fairly, free from political interference and guided solely by the evidence and the public interest. Established over a century ago, the office has evolved into one of the most influential positions in British law, overseeing hundreds of thousands of cases each year.

Thank you for contacting the Private Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Chief Operating Officer, at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Your email has been received.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) email is [email protected]

Historical Background

The office dates back to the Prosecution of Offences Act 1879, which created the DPP to advise police and handle serious cases. The first holder, Sir John Maule QC, assumed the post in 1880 but operated with limited powers.

After a brief merger with the Treasury Solicitor in 1884, the role regained full independence under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1908. Significant modernisation occurred between 1944 and 1964 under Sir Theobald Mathew QC, who updated regulations, introduced new technology, and expanded staff numbers.

The pivotal moment came in 1986 with the launch of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. This transformed the DPP from leading a small department into the chief executive of a national prosecution service.

Role and Responsibilities

The Director of Public Prosecutions is the third most senior public prosecutor, ranking below the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The holder bears personal responsibility for approximately 7,000 CPS staff and around 800,000 prosecutions annually.

Key duties include applying the Full Code Test to decide whether cases should proceed, advising police during investigations, setting charges in complex matters, and issuing legal guidance and policies. The DPP also presents cases in court where necessary and supports victims and witnesses. Crucially, the role demands strict independence; prosecutorial decisions cannot be directed by government.

The DPP reports to the Attorney General, who accounts for the CPS in Parliament, but day-to-day operations remain free from ministerial control.

The Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code) is issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) under section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. This is the eighth edition of the Code and replaces all earlier versions and was published on the 26th October 2018. Almost 8 years without an update is quite a long time.

Appointment and Current Leadership

The DPP is appointed by the Attorney General for an initial five-year term following an open competition overseen by the Civil Service Commission. The process emphasises integrity, legal expertise, and leadership.

The current Director of Public Prosecutions is Stephen Parkinson, who took office on the 1st November 2023. A University College London law graduate, Parkinson qualified as a barrister in 1980 and later as a solicitor in 2005.

He began as a junior prosecutor in 1984, rose through CPS ranks, and held senior government posts, including Deputy Head of the Attorney General’s Office. For two decades he practised as a defence solicitor at Kingsley Napley, becoming Senior Partner in 2018. His unique experience on both sides of the courtroom equips him to lead the service effectively.

Stephen Parkinson has been announced as the new Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service. It is expected that he will take up the appointment in November 2023 for an initial term of five years. He will succeed the outgoing DPP, Max Hill KC.

Chair of the Bar Council, Nick Vineall KC, said: “The Bar Council would like to congratulate and welcome Stephen Parkinson as the new Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service.  Mr Parkinson practised as a barrister for over 20 years and then qualified as a solicitor and has had a distinguished career in both the public and the private sectors. We very much look forward to meeting and engaging with the new DPP on areas of mutual concern, at a time when the criminal justice sector is under unprecedented pressure, and Crown Court backlogs are at record levels.

“The Bar Council would also like to record its sincere thanks to the outgoing DPP, Max Hill KC, who steered the CPS through the Covid crisis and has always sought to ensure that remuneration for those involved in prosecuting on behalf of the CPS was on a par with criminal defence fees.” 

New DPP Stephen Parkinson announced – Bar Council comment

Stephen Parkinson Legal Experience

Challenges and Future Outlook

Today’s DPP operates under intense pressure. Backlogs, rising caseloads, and high-profile events such as civil disturbances test resources and impartiality.

Maintaining public trust while improving efficiency, supporting victims more effectively, and embracing digital transformation are key priorities. DPP Stephen Parkinson has emphasised collaborative working across the criminal justice system to reduce delays and deliver fair outcomes.

Charlies Prosecution Service (CPS)
Coming Soon at https://cpsgov.uk – Charlie’s Prosecution Service

Image of Stephen Parkinson : PA

Check out our related articles on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Complaints and Feedback, HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI), Rule of Law, Open Justice, Victims’ Right to Review (VRR), Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent