The Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill inserts wording into a small set of existing statutes to treat appearances by live video link or live audio link as equivalent to being brought before a judicial authority. It amends the Family Law Act 1996 (arrest for breach of order), provisions in the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 and the Policing and Crime Act 2009 (arrest without warrant), and a paragraph of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 that governs enforcement proceedings.
The practical effect is narrow but meaningful: certain pre‑trial and enforcement appearances can be conducted remotely, using the definition of “live video link” and “live audio link” given in section 56 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The Bill leaves procedural detail to existing rules and judicial practice, while raising immediate questions about safeguards, access to technology, and how courts will reconcile efficiency gains with fairness to vulnerable parties.
It applies to England and Wales and comes into force two months after enactment.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends specified statutes so that language about a person being "brought before" a court or judicial officer explicitly includes appearing via live video or live audio link, as defined by Criminal Justice Act 2003 s56. It does not create new procedural rules; it changes statutory recognition of remote presence.
Who It Affects
Court users in family and certain civil enforcement contexts, police and magistrates dealing with arrested persons, local authorities enforcing debts in England and Wales, and HM Courts & Tribunals Service as operator of remote facilities and systems.
Why It Matters
By folding the CJA 2003 definition into several non‑criminal statutes, the bill formalises remote presence for specific hearings and enforcement appearances, lowering statutory barriers to remote handling of custody‑related appearances and debtor enforcement. That changes logistics and legal arguments about where and how an appearance occurs without prescribing the procedural safeguards.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This Bill is short and specific: it inserts textual references in four places so that appearing by live video link or live audio link counts as being brought before a judicial authority or court in the contexts listed. Rather than inventing a new statutory regime for remote justice, it relies on the established technical meaning in Criminal Justice Act 2003 section 56 for the phrases "live video link" and "live audio link." That choice ties the Bill to a pre‑existing statutory definition of the technologies involved but does not, on its face, import the broader procedural rules that courts and practice directions currently use for remote hearings.
Functionally, the Bill addresses three clusters of situations. First, family law enforcement: it clarifies that a person arrested for breach of a family court order may be treated as before the court even if they appear via live link.
Second, arrest‑related appearances: similar language goes into two police/arrest provisions so that persons arrested without warrant and brought to a judicial officer can appear remotely. Third, civil enforcement: the statutory text that governs presence for debtor enforcement in the Local Government Finance Act is extended to include remote presence.
Each insertion is narrowly drafted to change the legal status of remote appearances rather than to set out how those appearances must be run.Because the Bill amends existing statutes rather than replacing procedural instruments, much of the day‑to‑day effect will flow from how judges, the Civil and Family Procedure Rules, and HMCTS implement and publish practice directions. The Bill does not mandate consent from the participant, specify technology or accessibility requirements, set evidential protocols for identity or recording, or create express protections for vulnerable people.
Those gaps mean delivery will depend on guidance, court discretion and administrative capacity rather than on the Bill itself.The Bill applies only in England and Wales and includes a short commencement clause: it becomes effective two months after it receives Royal Assent. Its narrow drafting makes it relatively simple to operate legally, but also leaves open contested questions about fairness, digital access and operational funding that courts and administrators must resolve in practice.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Bill amends section 47 of the Family Law Act 1996 to state that being ‘brought before’ the court includes appearing via live video link or live audio link.
It inserts parallel wording into section 9 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 and section 43 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 so arrested persons may be treated as appearing before a judge or justice by live link.
Schedule 4 to the Local Government Finance Act 1992 is amended to make a debtor’s ‘presence’ on enforcement matters include presence via live video or live audio link.
The Bill adopts the meanings of “live video link” and “live audio link” set out in Criminal Justice Act 2003 section 56, so audio‑only appearances are explicitly within scope.
The Act extends only to England and Wales and comes into force two months after passage; it changes statutory recognition of remote appearances but does not create procedural rules or technical standards.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Family Law Act 1996 — recognise remote appearance for breach‑of‑order arrests
This provision inserts language into s.47 so that an arrested person is considered ‘brought before’ the family court if they appear via a live video or live audio link. Practically, magistrates and family judges will have a statutory basis to take remote appearances in proceedings that arise from arrests for breach of family court orders; it removes an express statutory obstacle to remote handling in those narrow circumstances. The amendment does not prescribe consent, welfare safeguards, or technical requirements, leaving those questions to judicial practice and court rules.
Anti‑social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 — arrested persons and live link
This sub‑section modifies s.9 to treat appearing by live video or audio link as equivalent to being brought before a judge or justice of the peace for arrests without warrant under that Act. The change matters for police and magistrates’ courts logistics: it authorises remote formal appearances linked to arrest powers, potentially reducing the need to transport detainees for initial hearings or administrative remands. Implementation will depend on judicial willingness to exercise discretion and on police/court operational capacity.
Policing and Crime Act 2009 — same recognition for judge appearances
The Bill makes a parallel amendment to s.43 so that where that provision requires a person to be brought before a judge, appearing through a live video or audio link satisfies the statutory requirement. This aligns the legal status of appearances across related arrest provisions, preventing inconsistent outcomes where one statute recognises remote presence and another does not. The practical effect will be immediate: defence representatives, custody officers and magistrates will be able to rely on the statute when arranging remote production.
Local Government Finance Act 1992 (Schedule 4) — debtor presence by live link
This amendment adjusts the enforcement schedule used by local authorities to include a debtor’s presence by live video or audio link. For enforcement officers and local authority legal teams, that means statutory recognition for remote hearings or attendance tied to council enforcement actions (for example, council tax enforcement). The change may speed up enforcement workflows but raises identical access and fairness issues to those in the criminal and family contexts.
Extent, commencement and short title
This short clause limits the Act to England and Wales, sets commencement at two months after passage, and provides the Act’s short title. The two‑month deferred commencement gives a brief window for administrative adjustments but does not mandate any preparatory steps or funding; operational readiness will therefore rely on existing HMCTS procedures, rule committees and local court administration to bridge the gap.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- HM Courts & Tribunals Service and court administrators — gain statutory cover to run certain pre‑trial and enforcement appearances remotely, which can reduce transport logistics and free courtroom time.
- Police custody and court liaison teams — can avoid or reduce physical transfers of arrested persons for initial appearances, saving officer time and custody resources.
- Local authorities enforcing debts — will be able to treat remote attendance as presence for enforcement hearings, speeding administrative enforcement and reducing cancellations due to non‑attendance.
- Litigants with mobility constraints or who live remotely — may find earlier and easier access to initial hearings or enforcement proceedings without travel burdens.
Who Bears the Cost
- HM Courts & Tribunals Service — must provide, maintain and secure the technical infrastructure and training needed to run remote appearances in a way that is consistent with judicial expectations.
- Vulnerable defendants and litigants without reliable internet or private spaces — face practical disadvantages if courts favour remote appearances without tailored safeguards or alternatives.
- Legal practitioners and duty solicitors — will need to adapt case management, client interview practice and evidential procedures to handle remote production, potentially increasing preparatory work.
- Local authorities and police forces — may face one‑off administrative costs and ongoing time commitments to coordinate remote appearances and ensure identification and fairness protocols are met.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The Bill trades statutory simplicity and operational flexibility for unresolved questions about fairness and access: it makes remote appearance legally equivalent to physical presence in specific contexts, which promotes efficiency and practical convenience, but it provides no statutory framework to guarantee that remote hearings will meet the procedural‑fairness, accessibility and safeguarding standards that in‑person attendance has traditionally delivered.
The Bill is deliberately narrow: it alters the statutory recognition of remote presence in a few specific provisions but leaves procedural detail unaddressed. That creates a predictable implementation pathway — judges and rule committees keep control over courtroom practice — but also shifts the burden of resolving contested questions (consent, welfare, interpreters, identity verification, recording and data‑protection standards) onto non‑statutory instruments and administrative practice.
Absent express statutory safeguards, courts will need to square remote procedures with existing rules designed for in‑person proceedings, and parties may litigate whether specific remote arrangements met fair‑trial standards.
Another practical tension is funding and capacity. The Bill assumes the technical and logistical capability to operate live video and audio links, yet it does not allocate money or set minimum technical standards.
That gap risks unequal experiences between well‑resourced court centres and under‑resourced ones, and between parties who can access private, high‑quality connections and those who cannot. Finally, relying on Criminal Justice Act 2003 s56 to define the technologies involved brings clarity but also carries the baggage of a definition developed in criminal law contexts; it may not map neatly onto the procedural and welfare considerations that family and civil enforcement settings demand.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.