State of the courts – three years after our five-point plan

Justice is a vital public service. It is as essential to our society as schools or hospitals. Yet underinvestment has left too many courts struggling to deliver for the community. When buildings fall into disrepair, technology fails and cases are delayed, people are denied timely access to justice.

25 Sep 2025

3 minutes read

In 2022, we surveyed solicitors about their experiences of courts and tribunals.

Solicitors highlighted systemic issues of delays, deteriorating buildings and unreliable technology.

Three years on, we repeated the survey. The results are clear: the same issues continue to plague our courts.

The government must make a sustained investment in both the physical court estate and reliable technology.

This will ease the backlogs and ensure our courts can better serve the public.

Fixing our courts is achievable and an essential step towards restoring our justice system.

Key findings

With responses from almost 300 solicitors, the results show little improvement in the state of the courts since 2022.

To see the infographic about this topic, please refer to the live page.

Physical buildings

Solicitors reported feeling safe in court buildings overall. In some areas, there were improvements in court infrastructure.

For example, in the Midlands, 80% consider the courts to be fit for purpose. This is a 15% increase from 2022.

However, the same proportion of solicitors considered the courts to be fit for purpose in 2025 as in 2022. This shows a lack of improvement over the last three years.

55% still consider the physical states of the courts to be fit for purpose ‘to some extent’ and 17% ‘to a large extent’.

Key issues mentioned were:

the presence of reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) at Doncaster Magistrates Court, Preston and Harrow
a lack of sufficiently soundproofed conference rooms, with only 54% of respondents able to talk confidentially with their clients
basic facilities to support physical comfort, such as heating, air conditioning, water and drinks facilities, with only 49% of respondents saying they felt physically comfortable whilst attending court

Technology

Solicitors’ views of technology in the courts have not changed much since 2022.

While 64% say technology at courts is ‘fit for purpose’, one in five of those who responded told us that it was ‘not at all’ fit for purpose.

Courts in the Midlands saw another increase – 85% said that courts’ technology was fit for purpose.

There were mixed views on access to appropriate technologies whilst at court. Issues cited included:

poor connection
poor quality of virtual hearings
broken or poor-quality equipment
lack of working plugs in both conference rooms and the court

Delays

One-third of solicitors who had cases moved to remote hearings considered it inappropriate for the type of case.

In general, solicitors highlighted the inappropriate use of remote hearings for defendants in custody, citing:

technical and logistical failures
lack of confidentiality and access to client
reduced fairness and effectiveness, and
the impact of remote hearings on vulnerable clients

Experiences of disabled solicitors

Disabled solicitors were more likely to report the physical state of the courts and the court technology as being not at all fit for purpose compared to those with no disability.

To see the infographic about this topic, please refer to the live page.

What’s working

Around three-quarters (72%) of solicitors indicated, overall, the physical state of the court was either ‘to some extent’ or ‘to a large extent’ fit for purpose.

When asked for details of positive court experiences, 37 respondents left a comment. These focused on:

helpful, diligent and friendly staff – including security staff and witness support staff
facilities and cleanliness – courts being clean and well maintained
efficiency and management – efficient case listings and management of cases

“Dedicated and diligent security staff and HMCTS Staff (including managers) doing their very best in deteriorating conditions.”
Birmingham Civil and Family Justice Centre

“Crewe, Chester and Warrington Magistrates Courts. An absolute pleasure to attend. Efficient listing and management of cases. The ability to discuss with the prosecution and legal advisors who aren't overloaded and can manage the case load.”
Employed by an organisation that represents people who use the justice system, such as victims, defendants or witnesses

What’s not working

Lack of consultation rooms – where rooms were available, these were often locked, not soundproofed and poorly equipped (too small, not enough chairs, no desk)
Poor building conditions and maintenance – court buildings were seen as “ramshackled and at best neglected”, in a “poor state of repair”, and “on their last legs”. Despite the best efforts of cleaning staff, courts never looked clean and were viewed as being “in a desperate need for repair and modernisation”
No heating or air conditioning – in winter it was “freezing”, in the summer “boiling”. Staff at Snaresbrook Crown Court had been unable to turn off the heating until May, making the court “extremely hot and making it difficult to concentrate”
Poor wifi connection
Poor quality virtual hearings or virtual hearings not possible
Technology not working – broken, poor-quality equipment
Lack of plug sockets in courtrooms and in conference rooms
Lack of technology or missing technology
Software issues – problems with the Common Platform or Clickshare
Judicial inconsistency – no use of electronic bundle or when virtual hearings are used
Unknown tech present or lack of tech support
No link booths, no conference rooms and issues with links to prisons

“In the cells there is no protection from possibly violent clients in tiny consultation rooms.”
Defence lawyer

“It is without hyperbole that I describe this court centre as a disgrace and not fit for purpose. If it wasn't for the excellent court staff holding everything together, this centre couldn't function.

“To give an example, the court had to close early for two days within the last twelve months or so. This was because dead and rotting seagulls were within the roof insulation. The court had to close because maggots were literally raining down onto the lobby.”
South Shields – employed by an organisation that represents people who use the justice system, such as victims, defendants or witnesses

“Heating failed Christmas 2023, collapsing trial and retrial October 2024 at another Crown Court. Only at St Albans due to the concrete issues at Harrow. Client in custody throughout. Client acquitted.”
Employed by an organisation that represents people who use the justice system, such as victims, defendants or witnesses