Court service covers up IT bug that caused evidence to go missing

It has recently been reported that the courts in England and Wales have been accused of covering up an IT bug that caused evidence to go missing, which could have affected the outcome of cases.

An internal report, leaked to the BBC, found it took several years for the courts to react to an IT bug that had caused evidence to go missing, be overwritten, or appear lost, which, as a result, judges in civil, family, and tribunal courts will have made rulings on cases when evidence was incomplete.

Sources within HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) stated that they were unaware of the full extent of the data corruption, including whether or how it had impacted cases, as they had not conducted a comprehensive investigation. The report also found that judges and lawyers were not informed of the breach as HMCTS management decided it would be “more likely to cause harm than good”.

HMCTS states that its internal investigation found “no evidence that any outcomes were affected as a result of these technical issues.”

Sir James Munby, former head of the High Court’s family division, told the BBS that the situation was “shocking” and “a scandal”.

The HMCTS is a Ministry of Justice (MoJ) agency that administers courts throughout England and Wales, as well as tribunals across the UK.

The IT bug was found in case-management software used by HMCTS. The case management software is used to manage evidence and track cases before the courts. Known as Judicial Case Manager, MyHMCTS, or CCD, it is used by judges, lawyers, case workers, and members of the public.

The BBC claims documents they have seen show it caused data to be obscured from view, so evidence such as medical records, contact details, and other things were sometimes not visible as part of case files used in court, which could have affected the outcome of cases.

While the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) Tribunal appears to have been the most significantly affected, the BBC reports that other courts dealing with matters such as family law, probate, employment, and financial claims may also have suffered data loss due to similar bugs.

Sources claim decisions may have been made in cases without all available evidence, an alarming prospect in jurisdictions where outcomes can directly affect vulnerable individuals—such as in child protection or disability benefit appeals.

“These hearings often decide the fate of people’s lives,” Sir James Munby told the BBC. “An error could mean the difference between a child being removed from an unsafe environment or a vulnerable person missing out on benefits.”

A “culture of cover-ups”

According to whistleblowers within HMCTS, the issue dates back as far as 2019. The leaked internal report indicates that senior technical staff repeatedly raised concerns, but these were not fully investigated or escalated.

The cover-up has been likened to the Horizon Post Office Scandal, where the higher-ups tried to suppress evidence of the system’s flaws. Apparently, the software, introduced in 2018, was “not designed properly or robustly” and had a long history of data loss. One source stated that there was a ‘general reluctance from senior management to “acknowledge or face reality” of the situation’, despite repeated warnings from agency IT staff.

Another source said, “There is a culture of cover-ups.”

“They’re not worried about risk to the public; they’re worried about people finding out about the risk to the public. It’s terrifying to witness.”

Insufficient investigations

The initial HMCTS investigation looked only at a narrow sample—reviewing a small proportion of cases over a three-month window—despite the software fault potentially affecting records for years. Of 609 potentially impacted tribunal cases reviewed, only 109 (17%) were examined further. HMCTS reported just one case where a “potentially significant impact” was identified.

HMCTS sources said this was a snapshot of just three months’ worth of data and that it was totally insufficient in regard to the nature of the problem. One employee of HMCTS was so concerned about the bug, they raised a formal whistleblower complaint, which prompted further internal investigation. This led to a report by a senior IT professional from the Prison Service and resulted in a detailed report, distributed internally in November 2024. This is the report that was leaked to the BBC.

The report investigators interviewed 15 witnesses, including software engineers and developers, and reviewed internal documents such as incident logs and diary entries. It found that “large-scale” data breaches should have been addressed “as soon as they were known”. According to the report, HMCTS had taken several years to react despite multiple warnings from senior technical staff, from 2019 onwards.

The investigators came to the conclusion that HMCTS had not undertaken a comprehensive investigation, and the full extent of data corruption was not yet known, including if cases had been affected. One source told the BBC:

“This is quite a frightening possibility, that information gets lost, no one notices, and there is a miscarriage of justice. I think that has to be the biggest worry.”

Several MoJ data breaches were reported in 2025

This is not the first data breach reported from the Ministry of Justice this year. In May 2025, it was discovered that the Legal Aid Agency, an executive government agency sponsored by the MoJ that provides individuals in England and Wales with civil and criminal legal aid and advice, had suffered a cyberattack, where a significant amount of personal data from those who had applied for legal aid through their digital service since 2007. It is thought that up to 2.1 million personal records have been compromised.

The Legal Aid Agency data breach occurred due to the LAA’s fragile IT systems, which had been neglected for many years, leaving them vulnerable to attack, putting people’s data at risk.

In a separate but related issue, a different IT flaw reportedly led to the disappearance of over 4,000 documents from hundreds of public family law cases, including those involving child protection. Although this issue was discovered in 2023 and reportedly resolved, there is no indication that any retrospective review took place to assess the effect on affected cases.

The Ministry of Justice declined to comment on whether any emergency child protection proceedings were impacted.

Calls for accountability and reform

Legal and political figures have expressed serious concern. Former Justice Secretary Alex Chalk—who was in office during part of the initial HMCTS review—told the BBC he had not been made aware of the findings and called for a full-scale investigation into both the technological failures and HMCTS’s internal governance.

Liberal Democrat Shadow Attorney General Ben Maguire MP echoed the call, urging an independent review to assess whether miscarriages of justice occurred.

HMCTS maintains that it found no evidence of adverse outcomes and insists that all parties “had access to the documents they needed.” It has also reaffirmed its commitment to continued digitisation.

The actions of the HMCTS are unacceptable. Not only did they ignore an IT issue that was repeatedly raised, but they covered it up once discovered, even though it could have affected the outcome of court cases. Those whose court cases could have been affected could have the possibility to have their cases decision looked at again.

HNK Solicitors can help with your data breach claim  

If you have been affected by any of the MoJ data breaches, including the Legal Aid Agency data breach, you could be entitled to claim compensation. HNK Solicitors has a team of dedicated data breach solicitors who can support you in making a claim. They have a deep knowledge of data protection law and many years of experience helping clients to successfully obtain compensation after being the victim of a data breach.

To start your claim today, get in touch with the team on 0151 668 0810, enquiries@hnksolicitors.com, or fill in our online claim form. We offer free no-obligation consultations and can even take on cases on a no-win, no-fee basis.