The pressure on the criminal courts is well documented. With growing caseloads, lengthy delays and increasing demands on practitioners, meaningful reform is urgently needed. But following the Government’s latest response to the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, an important question remains: will the proposed changes make a difference where it matters most?
A renewed focus on court efficiency
In October 2026, the Government published its response to Lord Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, setting out its position on 180 recommendations aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of criminal proceedings.
The announcement followed a change in direction on some of the more controversial proposals to restrict jury trials. While plans for certain judge-only trials have been dropped, wider reforms intended to address the Crown Court backlog remain firmly on the agenda. These include extending magistrates sentencing powers to 2 years, removing the right to elect crown court trial and the automatic right to appeal a magistrates court decision. These proposals are opposed by the CLSA and we continue to work with fellow practitioner groups to highlight our concerns.
Among the measures being progressed are improvements to case management, greater use of technology and changes designed to reduce unnecessary delays.
For criminal defence solicitors, however, the success of these reforms will depend less on their ambitions and more on how effectively they work in practice.
The everyday reality of court delays
The Government’s response acknowledges the scale of the challenge. In June 2026, almost 81,000 cases were awaiting resolution in the Crown Court, with nearly 24,000 outstanding for a year or longer.
Behind those figures are individuals and families living with uncertainty, alongside legal professionals managing increasingly unpredictable workloads.
For defence solicitors, delayed proceedings can mean repeated client meetings, difficulties maintaining contact with witnesses, additional preparation and the challenge of keeping cases progressing when hearing dates change. As well as causing cash flow issues, with billing not being possible until the conclusion of the case.
The consequences extend beyond administrative inconvenience. Evidence may become harder to obtain, memories can fade and clients may face prolonged restrictions on their lives while proceedings remain unresolved.
Reducing delays is therefore fundamental to maintaining confidence in the criminal justice system.
Can technology provide part of the answer?
One area attracting renewed attention is the use of technology to improve court efficiency.
The Government has announced plans to pilot virtual remand hearings, allowing defendants to attend their first court appearance remotely from police custody suites in participating areas.
There is also a focus on improving listing arrangements, strengthening case progression and making better use of digital systems.
These developments offer potential benefits, particularly where they reduce unnecessary travel, administrative duplication and avoidable adjournments.
However, technology alone cannot resolve the pressures facing criminal justice. Remote hearings must preserve effective participation, confidential access to legal advice and the ability of solicitors to represent their clients properly.
Similarly, improved digital systems will only deliver meaningful efficiencies if they are reliable, accessible and supported by appropriate training.
Reform must work for practitioners
Criminal defence solicitors understand the practical reasons cases are delayed. Late disclosure, unavailable witnesses, difficulties securing client attendance and last-minute listing changes can all prevent hearings from proceeding.
Addressing these problems requires cooperation across the criminal justice system, supported by adequate resources and realistic expectations.
It also requires recognising the essential role of defence practitioners. Greater efficiency cannot come at the expense of proper preparation, effective representation or procedural fairness.
As the latest reforms move towards implementation, meaningful engagement with those working in police stations and courts every day will be essential.
Looking beyond the backlog
The Government’s latest proposals represent another significant attempt to tackle longstanding problems within the criminal courts.
Their success should ultimately be measured not simply by the number of cases processed, but by whether proceedings become more timely, reliable and fair for everyone involved.
For the CLSA and its members, the priority remains clear: reform must strengthen access to justice while ensuring criminal defence solicitors have the resources, time and support necessary to represent their clients effectively.