Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Coroners - From: 1980 To: 1984

This page lists 7 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
Regina v Her Majesty's Coroner at Hammersmith ex parte Peach [1980] QB 211
1980
CA
Lord Denning MR, Bridge LJ, Cairns Sir David
Coroners
A coroner was obliged to sit with a jury under the section 13(2) of the 1926 Act where the deceased, who was watching a demonstration, was struck a violent blow on the back of his head from which he died.
Bridge LJ said: "The key to the nature of that limitation is to be found, I think, in the paragraph's concern with the continuance or possible recurrence of the circumstances in question." The recurrence of the circumstances referred to are those which "may reasonably and ought properly to be avoided by the taking of appropriate steps which it is in the power of some responsible body to take."
Lord Denning MR: "when the circumstances are such that similar fatalities may possibly recur in the future, and it is reasonable to expect that some action should be taken to prevent their recurrence."
Sir David Cairns said: "The difficulty is to find a meaning which does not do violence to the words of the Act and which gives effect to what may be taken to have been the intention of Parliament. The reference to 'continuance or possible recurrence' indicates to my mind that the provision was intended to apply only to circumstances the continuance or recurrence of which was preventable or to some extent controllable. Moreover, since it is prejudice to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public that is referred to, what is envisaged must I think be something which might be prevented or safeguarded by a public authority or some other person or body whose activities can be said to affect a substantial section of the public. I cannot find any justification for any further limitation of the meaning of the paragraph in question."
Coroners (Amendment) Act 1926 13(2)
1 Citers


 
Regina v West Yorkshire Coroner ex parte Smith [1983] QB 335; [1982] 2 WLR 1071; [1982] 126 SJ 398; [1982] 2 All ER 801
1982
QBD

Coroners
The applicant's daughter had died in Kenya. Her body was returned to England and he sought an inquest. Held: The court did not have jurisdiction to hold an inquest.
Coroners Act 1887 3(1) 7(1)
1 Citers


 
Regina v West Yorkshire Coroner ex parte Smith [1982] 3 WLR 920; [1982] 126 SJ 728; [1982] 3 All ER 1098
2 Jan 1982
CA
Donaldson LJ
Coroners
The applicant challenged the refusal of the coroner to hold an inquest into the death of his daughter in Rhodesia. Held: Coroners in England and Wales are under a duty to investigate a death which occurred overseas if both the body is returned to the coroner's district and the circumstances are such that an investigation would have been conducted if the death had occurred in England and Wales. Donaldson LJ said that Parliament could have added a rider that if the death occurred abroad other than on the high seas, the coroner need not or even should not enquire into the cause of death. The words of this section were clearly and wholly free from ambiguity. He continued: "Once it is appreciated that it is the dead body lying within the jurisdiction which gives rise to the need for inquiry and which is the subject of the inquiry, the section is free from any possible objection that it creates what the Americans call a "long arm jurisdiction".
and "The presence of a dead body in this country is a factor of significance. It creates a very real and legitimate public interest in holding an inquiry, and this interest is no way extra-territorial. In the absence of a death certificate by an appropriate authority in this country, it may well be considered essential at the very least to ascertain where the body came from, whether the deceased died in this country and, if so, how. The public interest centres upon the body which is in this country, upon the cause of death of that body and only incidentally upon where that cause or the death itself occurred."
and "Inevitably a coroner conducting an inquisition into a death abroad will be faced with difficulties of evidence and so on, but that must have been so ever since the statute of George II . . Coroners are well experienced [in] dealing with such problems."
Coroners Act 1887 3(1) 7(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Walthamstow Coroner, Ex parte Rubenstein Unreported, 19 February 1982
19 Feb 1982


Coroners
The 1988 Act was a consolidating Act.
Coroners Act 1988 83
1 Citers


 
Regina v South London Coroner ex parte Ruddock Unreported, 8 July 1982
8 Jul 1982
CA
Lord Lane CJ
Coroners
"The coroner's task in a case such as this is a formidable one … once again, it should not be forgotten that an inquest is a fact-finding exercise and not a method of apportioning guilt. The procedure and rules of evidence which are suitable for the one are unsuitable for the other. In an inquest it should never be forgotten that there are no parties, there is no indictment, there is no prosecution, there is no defence, there is no trial, simply an attempt to establish facts. It is an inquisitorial process, a process of investigation quite unlike a criminal trial where the prosecution accuses and the accused defends, the judge holding the balance or the ring, whichever metaphor one chooses to use".


 
 Regina v South London Coroner ex parte Thompson; 8-Jul-1982 - [1982] 126 SJ 625
 
Regina v West Yorkshire Coroner ex parte Smith (No 2) [1985] 1 All ER 100; Times, 03 October 1984
3 Oct 1984
QBD

Coroners, Contempt of Court
The applicant was involved in a coroner's hearing regarding the death of his daughter. During the hearing, he accused one witness of having murdered her. The accusation was reported. He was fined £50.00 for contempt of court. He sought judicial review saying that a coroner's court, not being a court of record, had no power of punishment for contempt. Held: The court was an inferior court but did have the power to punish a contempt in the face of the court. Such a power was necessary to keep order in a court.
Coroners Act 1887

 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.