The plans would free the courts from Treasure control, placing court buildings and thousands of staff in the hands of private companies.
The system would be funded by extracting larger fees from wealthy litigants and private sector investment, and by encouraging hedge funds to invest by an attractive rate of return, according to The Times.
Fears that privatisation would erode the independence of the courts would be allayed by placing the courts under a Royal Charter, as has been proposed for the regulation of the press.
Earlier this year Justice Secretary Chris Grayling paved the way for reform by instructing officials to explore plans and ensure that the Courts and Tribunal Service provides value for money.
Mr Grayling, who is thought to be in strongly in favour of the reforms, will be presented with a paper outlining the options within two weeks, and the changes could begin this autumn.
The changes range from transferring the running and maintenance of court buildings to a private company to more radical proposals such as transferring the 20,000 courts staff into the private sector.
Judges and magistrates would not be affected by the plans.
The former Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, opposed the proposals.
He told The Times: “I am all in favour of making more money from commercial court users, and I am also all in favour of those who commit crime making a bigger contribution to the courts.
“What I am not in favour of is privatising the courts. The courts should not be beholden to any private provider because the courts have to be independent of every interest.
“In particular I would be strongly against court buildings being placed in the hands of private providers. We should not have [them] influencing when courts open and close their doors or judges having to negotiate with private contractors over whether, for instance, a court can be open on a Saturday for an emergency injunction.”
And, no, keeping judges and magistrates out of it does not make this at all a good idea.
