A coroner may be liable for costs after a wrongful refusal of an adjournment. A mistake by a medical expert caused the need for a new inquest. A request that the coroner should pay the applicant’s costs was granted. The court identified why the order should be made: (1) Although it was not a case which called for strong disapproval of the coroner’s actions, the court had attached some measure of blame to him; (2) More importantly, he had sought to defeat the challenge to his decisions, and was certainly not represented in the role of amicus curiae, or anything of that nature. He would no doubt have been seeking his costs and would have been entitled to them if he had won; (3) The applicant was not legally aided; (4) The court was unable to recognise any principle that said that in these circumstances some special protection should be give to the coroner.
Judges:
McCowan LJ and Buxton J
Citations:
Ind Summary 12-Sep-1994, Times 19-Oct-1994, [1995] 6 Med LR 116
Cited by:
Cited – Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham CA 27-Feb-2004
The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent.
Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Coroners, Costs
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86440