UK Orders Deletion of Country's Largest Court Reporting Archive (thetimes.com)
(Wednesday February 11, 2026 @05:45PM (msmash)
from the ministry-of-injustice dept.)
- Reference: 0180771334
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/02/11/1656216/uk-orders-deletion-of-countrys-largest-court-reporting-archive
- Source link: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/moj-orders-deletion-of-uks-largest-court-reporting-archive-27f5zcbb7
The UK's Ministry of Justice has ordered the [1]deletion of the country's largest court reporting archive
Courtsdesk's research found that journalists received no advance notice of 1.6 million criminal hearings, that court case listings were accurate on just 4.2% of sitting days, and that half a million weekend cases were heard without any press notification. In November, HM Courts and Tribunal Service issued a cessation notice citing "unauthorized sharing" of court data based on a test feature.
Courtsdesk says it wrote 16 times asking for dialogue and requested a referral to the Information Commissioner's Office; no referral was made. The government issued a final refusal last week, and the archive must now be deleted within days. Chris Philp, the former justice minister who approved the pilot and now shadow home secretary, has written to courts minister Sarah Sackman demanding the decision be reversed.
[1] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/moj-orders-deletion-of-uks-largest-court-reporting-archive-27f5zcbb7
[2] https://www.thejournal.ie/courtsdesk-enda-leahy-uk-government-deletion-of-database-6953554-Feb2026/
[2]non-paywalled source
, a database built by data analysis company Courtsdesk that more than 1,500 journalists across 39 media organizations have used since the lord chancellor approved the project in 2021.Courtsdesk's research found that journalists received no advance notice of 1.6 million criminal hearings, that court case listings were accurate on just 4.2% of sitting days, and that half a million weekend cases were heard without any press notification. In November, HM Courts and Tribunal Service issued a cessation notice citing "unauthorized sharing" of court data based on a test feature.
Courtsdesk says it wrote 16 times asking for dialogue and requested a referral to the Information Commissioner's Office; no referral was made. The government issued a final refusal last week, and the archive must now be deleted within days. Chris Philp, the former justice minister who approved the pilot and now shadow home secretary, has written to courts minister Sarah Sackman demanding the decision be reversed.
[1] https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/moj-orders-deletion-of-uks-largest-court-reporting-archive-27f5zcbb7
[2] https://www.thejournal.ie/courtsdesk-enda-leahy-uk-government-deletion-of-database-6953554-Feb2026/
Embarrassing (Score:1, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward
UK is frustrated with reports on social media arrests.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
by Vlad_the_Inhaler ( 32958 )
> Every judge in the UK is an active pedophile.
Is that you, Elon?
Reporting the wrong info (Score:4, Insightful)
by Snert32 ( 10404345 )
If the database is reporting that the government does a poor job (not informing reporters, very low accuracy rate), there are two choices: 1) Do a better job, or 2) Cancel the reporting. Of course, the answer is obvious ...
As an American: Can it be hosted in the USA? (Score:2)
by pimpsoftcom ( 877143 )
I'm sure I'm not the only American that's willing to host and support The Free Press.
In America, UK has no power (since 1776)
Imagine the political possibilities if we hosted this on American soil on American servers.
Re: (Score:2)
by fabioalcor ( 1663783 )
Seems fair, as long as USA let their "content of interest" (i.e. Epstein files) to be hosted abroad.
Ok (Score:1)
So seems they took the freely given data and sold it off to AI companies. I see why they're unimpressed.
Re: (Score:2)
> So seems they took the freely given data and sold it off to AI companies. I see why they're unimpressed.
not in the way we'd normally think.
the non-paywall article is more informative than the main:
> Leahy said Courtsdesk didn’t “share” data with an AI company but “hired them to test an idea”.
> He also said that “every word of what they could do with the data was written down”.
> “They could not use the data for any purpose other than providing services to us; they could not share it with anyone; and they could not use it to train any AI model.”
> He said all of this information was related to the Ministry of Justice but that no response was received.
they also mention that the current governments' own data privacy department doesn't consider it a breach of any sort.
either the MoJ is confused or they really are trying to decrease transparency
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or the MoJ is horribly embarrassed when shown that they are doing a really bad job. 4.2% accuracy? Unacceptable in a nation that relies upon public trials to ensure justice.
This also serves as a reminder as to why the separation of powers is a good thing. The UK puts the legislature in charge of everything, instead of breaking out the court and executive branches.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
The USA has put the executive in charge of everything, with far worse results. Constitutions aren't worth jack if nobody enforces them, and the USA has the government executing citizens in the street with impunity.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
One American citizen executed in the street by masked men is still one too many
Re: (Score:2)
It absolutely is.
But using that to claim this is 1936 Germany with the Gestapo summarily executing people is fucking stupid.
This is law enforcement run amok- it's what happens when you hire any fucking moron with a tiny dick you can, throw a badge and a gun in their hands, and tell them to go round up "illegals".
These dumb fuckers aren't professionals.
Frankly, it's remarkable there have been as few shootings as there have been.
But still, the Gestapo they are not.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing with all of that is that the particular system doesn't matter too much.
Good people can make bad systems work. Good systems cannot make bad people work.
And the oft touted checks and balances fail when you need them the most.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a counsel of despair! In any sufficiently large group, there will always be bad people and mad people, but they can do relatively little damage by themselves. The question is how to prevent them from rising to power.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
> the USA has the government executing citizens in the street with impunity.
Absolute propaganda. The lady that was shot by ICE was resisting arrest after intentionally interfering with federal authorities lawful duties. She tried to flee by car, pointed it at an agent and accelerated. The agent shot in self defense and the photos clearly show a gunshot through the front windshield. Your version is as abhorrent as the "hands up, don't shoot" lie where a cop shot a person that was beating on the cop as
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you Dr. Darvo
Re: (Score:1)
If either of those fairy stories was true, there'd be a transparent investigation, potentially a trial. The many publically available videos, and the analysis of the same by well recognised experts, strongly disagrees with your claims. Statements from the executive branch on the subject were full of trivially provable lies.
Re: (Score:2)
How can you have an investigation when leftist agitators forced federal agents to withdraw from the scene and where local authorities refuse to act? Any evidence was compromised by the same people who are crying foul. In the first case, the video evidence is conclusive on its own. In the second, events are less clear. However, even in the second case, you can't deny that the guy was interfering with the lawful duties of federal agents while armed after previously attacking an ICE vehicle. That's a far
Re: (Score:2)
Could you expand on how someone was forced to withdraw, what timeline do you have for that?
You know I can see nothing in your comment that makes it ok for federal officers to kill people, there is nothing in there that even comes near the limit for deadly force or force in any matter.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have to believe that its okay to run over law enforcement with your car while fleeing arrest and that it's perfectly fine to attack agents and their vehicles while armed. Both instances had an easily demonstrable lethal threat to the federal agents which makes their use of force justifiable. How far gone do you have to be to think that the actions of either of those activists were in any way lawful or peaceful in nature?
Re: Ok (Score:2)
You said lady blah blah blah and then they executed her on the street. You said man blah blah blah and then they executed him on the street.
I think it is allowed in the USA based on watching Robocop
FTFY (Score:1)
> This persistent twisting of facts by the right has to stop.
Re: (Score:1)
Flat out lies. Any proper check of these stories will show video proving such.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Buddy you better take a look in the mirror.