Regina v Her Majesty’s Coroner for Inner London North ex parte Peter Francis Touche: CA 21 Mar 2001

The applicant’s wife had died of a cerebral haemorrhage, the result of severe hypertension, possibly secondary to eclampsia. The coroner decided not to hold an inquest. The issue raised was whether he was required to hold an inquest because there was reasonable cause to suspect that she had died an unnatural death.
Held: The coroner was wrong to conclude that a death was not unnatural within the Act where the death had occurred at a hospital when the hospital had failed adequately to monitor her blood pressure. The failure of a hospital to maintain standards of care was of concern to the public, and one of the coroners. Costs were awarded to the claimant both at the Court of Appeal and at the High Court, against the coroner when directing a new inquest into the death when there was no other means of indemnifying him for the expense to which he had been put, even though the coroner was a judicial officer who had conducted himself impeccably.

Citations:

Gazette 17-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 383, [2001] QB 1206

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Coroners Act 1988 8(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

DoubtedRegina v Lincoln Coroner, Ex Parte Hay Admn 19-Feb-1999
Coroners Society recommended to publish pre-trial guidelines and prepare a list of witnesses to be called showing in each case a brief summary of the evidence expected to be given by that witness in order to assist parties at inquests. A costs order . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedCorner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Costs

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147476