Holtham v Arnold: 1986

The court considered how it might decide between the competing claims of different family members to have control over the burial of the deceased. Hoffmann J said: ‘there seems to be no doubt that Mrs Holtham on the one side and the family on the other both feel very strongly that it is their right and duty to conduct the funeral. I think it is virtually impossible for a court to express any moral judgment as between them. The relationship between a man in the position of Mr Arnold and Mrs Holtham on the one hand and his family on the other are in the nature of things extremely difficult for an outsider to penetrate . . Indeed, I think it is a matter on which it would almost be presumptuous to try to explore. In those circumstances the only course really open to the court is to decide the matter according to law.’

Judges:

Hoffmann J

Citations:

[1986] 2 BMLR 123

Cited by:

CitedHartshorne v Gardner ChD 14-Mar-2008
The deceased died in a motor accident, aged 44. The parties, his mother and father, disputed control over his remains, and requested an order from the court.
Held: The court has such an inherent jurisdiction. Since the claimants had an equal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.267632