Court Service: Estate

House of Lords written question – answered at on 5 January 2010.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer Spokesperson for the Home Office

To ask Her Majesty's Government why they concluded in the rural impact assessment on magistrates' courts closures that extra costs for the public will not always be incurred, as suggested by the statement that "there may be travelling expenses for those attending courts"; and in what circumstances travelling expenses would not be incurred.

Photo of Lord Bach Lord Bach Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Ministry of Justice, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice

The impact assessment is concerned with any additional travelling expenses which a court user may incur if his case were transferred to a new court. However, such additional expenses may not always be incurred. For instance, many citizens are entitled to free travel on public transport, or court users who already had to travel to the old court may have a journey of similar length and expense to the new court. For each court, HMCS has conducted a draft impact assessment and comments on these assessments have been invited from respondents to the consultations. Only once all responses have been analysed will the impact assessment be finalised.

Does this answer the above question?

Yes0 people think so

No0 people think not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.