The shoddy state of most Crown Prosecution Service case files is highlighted in a report today which finds most are incomplete and missing data such as whether a defendant is on bail, or the outcome of a hearing.

The damning report by inspectors finds that in more than one third, or 36 per cent, of magistrates’ and crown court cases, a defendant’s bail status was not recorded on the file.

In 16 per cent of magistrates’ court files and 35 per cent of crown court files, the need for follow-up action was not recorded or highlighted as it should have been.

And in some cases, the omission led to essential action not being taken and cases having to be adjourned at the next hearing.

The report also reveals that in many cases the outcome of the court hearing was not even recorded: the results of at least one court hearing was missing from 11 per cent of magistrates’ files and 18 per cent of crown court files. In a small number of cases, cases were incorrectly finalised on the computer system which manages cases, as a result of “misleading or inaccurate endorsement of the result at court".

The audit by the Crown Prosecution Service inspectorate of the service’s performance over the keeping of its case files is based on 12 CPS areas and a total of 240 case files from both crown and magistrates’ courts’ cases.

The inspectorate says: “The audit’s main conclusion is that the majority of CPS case files are not maintained in a satisfactory manner.

“Decisions and actions taken are frequently not recorded; the lack of information and poor organisation frequently made it difficult, or impossible, for staff handling a case to ascertain what had happened previously; and it could also be difficult to locate documentation when needed.”

It says that the quality of file endorsements is “vital to all aspects of CPS work”.

“Failure to make clear and accurate endorsements on files can lead to incorrect decisions, failures to take timely actions and even to failed prosecutions.

“Should a case go to appeal or judicial review, good quality file endorsements will be imperative to understand the history of the case,” it says.

Incomplete files could also lead to poor communications with victims and failures to monitor custody time limts - resulting in defendants being detained unlawfully or being released from custody simply because the CPS had not applied for an extension to the time limit.

Historically the CPS has used paper files, but in 2004 an electronic case management system was introduced, the report says, and much of the work in CPS offices is undertaken on that system.

A CPS spokesperson said:“We welcome this report because it will help us to improve our performance. We accept the recommendations and will be taking steps across the organisation to address these issues.

“We are introducing an Optimum Business Model which is helping us to deal with processing files in the magistrates’ courts and which is reducing delays and improving our case management.

“This will be operational throughout the CPS before the end of the year.”

Explore Law

• Corporate Law

• Public Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Student Law

• Law Reports

Times Recommends

• Future Stars of the Bar 2008
• Lawyer of the Week: Julie Morris
• Charging suspects - why it's a job for prosecutors