Courts and Tribunals Bill — Written evidence submitted by Resolve (CTB43)

Written Evidence from Resolve onthe Courts and Tribunals Bill 2026
Harrison Box
Policy Officer
HarrisonBox@resolveuk.org.uk
April 28, 2026

About Resolve
Resolve is the UK’s leading community safety organisation. For 30 years, we have worked
closely with HM Government and the Civil Service to shape national policy and best
practice around anti-social behaviour (ASB) and related community safety issues —
including drug dealing, knife crime, vandalism, intimidation, harassment, and neighbour
disputes.
Drawing on our sector-leading expertise, we support Local Authorities, Housing
Providers, and Police Forces across the UK, helping practitioners respond to ASB and
community safety challenges confidently and effectively. Our vision is of communities that
are safe, empowered, and supportive environments where all residents can thrive.
Policy at Resolve
Resolve contributes to government consultations on issues affecting ASB and community
safety. We also undertake independent research and publish policy papers, available at:
https://www.resolveuk.org.uk/our-services/be-heard
Contact
Harrison Box,Policy OfficerHarrisonBox@resolveuk.org.uk
1

Executive Summary and Introduction
This submission addresses the provisions most relevant to victims of anti-social behaviour:
the extension of magistrates’ court sentencing powers (Clause 6); the introduction of the
Crown Court Bench Division (Clauses 3-5); and the reforms to special measures (Clauses
12-16). We also address a number of tabled amendments with material implications for
ASB victims. We stress the importance of specialist housing courts, which we address
within the conclusion, and the funding of staff including housing related training for issues
that cross in this way.
We understand that the most relevant civil connection for housing practitioners is
indirect rather than direct. The Bill does not reform possession proceedings, injunctions, or
civil enforcement in any way. However, its criminal reforms feed into civil outcomes some
ways. Firstly, Ground 7A possession claims and absolute grounds for injunctions under
the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 rely on a prior conviction. Faster
criminal proceedings therefore shorten the timeline to civil enforcement, even though the
civil proceedings themselves are untouched. Civil delays, despite it’s continuing pressures,
is often overlooked in favour of the criminal justice system. Of course, delays in the
justice system are consequential, and delays in the criminal justice system have upstream
affects to the civil justice system. Indeed, we lay out further in this response how housing
practitioners are experiencing delays in the justice system. Whether indirectly or not,
the justice system as a whole feels the effects of delays, we therefore repeat calls for a
fundamental review into the challenges posed to the civil system.
2

1 Backlog Reduction and ASB Victims
The Crown Court open caseload stood at 79,619 cases as of September 2025, and without
action is projected to reach 113,000 by March 2029 1. For victims of persistent ASB,
delay is not merely procedural. It extends the period during which they remain exposed
to the perpetrator, often in the same street or building. We know that operationally,
our members experience significant delays in issuing injunctions and closure orders for
example2. Amendment NC5 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would require the Lord Chancellor to
set and publish annual targets for the reduction of the Crown Court backlog, reporting
annually to Parliament on progress. Resolve supports published targets. Transparency
on case progression timescales matters to ASB victims and to the agencies coordinating
support around them. Amendment NC17 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would require a review
of the impact of the Act’s provisions on the efficiency of the criminal justice system,
specifically including the experience of victims and witnesses. Resolve would welcome a
specific assessment of outcomes for victims of persistent ASB within any such review.
2 Victim-Led Case Management and Access to Infor-
mation
Amendment NC7 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would require the Lord Chancellor to lay before
Parliament a strategy for Victim-Led Intensive Case Management in criminal court
proceedings. Resolve supports this. Victims of persistent ASB frequently experience
extended periods of uncertainty about the progress of their case, and a formal case
management strategy with victim experience as a stated objective would address a
documented gap in current practice. Amendment NC12 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would entitle
victims to receive court transcripts of judicial summings-up and bail decisions free of
charge, within 14 days of request. Resolve supports NC12 and considers it particularly
relevant to ASB victims. Bail conditions imposed on perpetrators directly affect victim
safety, and victims currently have no straightforward means of obtaining a formal record
of those conditions or the reasoning behind them. Access to transcripts without financial
barrier would also support victims in engaging with any subsequent review or appeal
process, particularly in cases where the perpetrator contests enforcement action.
1Courts and Tribunals Bill: Factsheet. GOV.UK.url: https : / / www . gov . uk / government /
publications / courts - and - tribunals - bill / courts - and - tribunals - bill - factsheet(visited
on 04/28/2026).
2Midland Heart.Written Evidence Submitted by Midland Heart. Letter. Apr. 17, 2024.url:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/127073/html/.
3

3 Special Measures Reforms (Clauses 12-16)
Resolve welcomes the reforms to special measures in Clauses 12-16. Victims of persistent
ASB frequently present as vulnerable or intimidated witnesses, particularly where the
perpetrator is a neighbour or known individual and where targeting has continued over a
prolonged period prior to proceedings. The Bill introduces a statutory special measure
enabling a companion to accompany a vulnerable or intimidated witness while giving
evidence, with a rebuttable presumption in favour of a professional supporter unless this
would not be in the interests of justice. In the ASB context, this may include support
workers or community safety practitioners who have been involved with the victim prior
to proceedings, and Resolve supports the provision on that basis. The Bill also clarifies
that courtroom screens shield both the witness and the defendant from each other, and
introduces a presumption that screens will be granted where requested for intimidated
witnesses giving evidence via live link or pre-recorded cross-examination. This clarification
has practical value in ASB cases involving perpetrators known to the victim. Amendment
NC30 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would require mandatory trauma-informed training for all court
staff working in the criminal courts. Resolve supports this. Victims of persistent ASB
may present with significant trauma arising from prolonged victimisation, and court staff
with adequate training in trauma responses are better placed to support these victims
through the court process without causing additional harm.
4

4 Public Confidence in the Criminal Justice System
Amendment NC13 (Jess Brown-Fuller) would require the Lord Chancellor to commission
a report on the effect of the Act’s provisions on public trust and participation in the
criminal justice system, including witness participation and public confidence. Resolve
supports this. Research conducted by Resolve indicates that confidence in the criminal
justice system among ASB victims is already low, and that a significant proportion of
victims do not report ASB due to a belief that nothing will be done 3. Any structural
reform to the courts should be monitored for its effect on victim reporting behaviour, and
Resolve would welcome ASB-specific data within any such report.
Conclusion
Resolve supports the Bill’s aim of reducing court delay and improving the experience
of victims in the criminal justice system. We have identified specific areas, particularly
around allocation decisions in triable either-way cases, access to the unduly lenient sentence
scheme, and the application of special measures, where the Bill’s provisions and a number
of the tabled amendments would benefit from explicit consideration of the circumstances of
ASB victims. We also continue to stress the need for a specialist housing courts. Specialist
Housing Courts would be of great benefit; claims would be processed more efficiently, heard
sooner by judges with significant relevant expertise, and resolved more decisively. Housing
Courts would end the problem of housing issues having to compete for time with other
types of case and judges being expected to maintain expertise in housing as well as other
equally complicated areas of civil law. Increasing courts’ capacity must also involve swifter
and more regular recruitment of staff a. Recruitment must incorporate supplementary
and more detailed training for judges in areas such as housing, which not many judges
have experience of in their previous years of practice.We would welcome the opportunity
to give oral evidence to the Committee if that would be of assistance.
3Resolve.Making Communities Safer: Results from the 2025 YouGov Survey on ASB Commissioned
by Resolve. 2025.
5

References
Courts and Tribunals Bill: Factsheet. GOV.UK.url: https://www.gov.uk/government/
publications / courts - and - tribunals - bill / courts - and - tribunals - bill -
factsheet(visited on 04/28/2026).
Midland Heart.Written Evidence Submitted by Midland Heart. Letter. Apr. 17, 2024.url:
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/127073/html/.
Resolve.Making Communities Safer: Results from the 2025 YouGov Survey on ASB
Commissioned by Resolve. 2025.
6

Resolve
Resolve, 10A The Downs, Altrincham, Cheshire WA14 2PU
www.resolveuk.org.uk
June 2026