The deceased died in custody. The jury returned a verdict of accidental death. It was suggested that the coroner’s direction as to unlawful killing had been confusing, and that he was wrong not to leave open the possibility of a verdict of neglect. Hed: When section 13 is invoked a fresh inquest can only be ordered where it is ‘necessary or desirable in the interests of justice’. Those are critical words. It was not the statutory power which was relied upon, but judicial review. As to what verdict should be left to the jury ‘The strength of the evidence is not the only consideration and, in relation to wider issues, the coroner has a broader discretion. If it appears there are circumstances which, in a particular situation, mean in the judgment of the coroner, acting reasonably and fairly, it is not in the interest of justice that a particular verdict should be left to the jury, he need not leave that verdict. He, for example, need not leave all possible verdicts just because there is technically evidence to support them. It is sufficient if he leaves those verdicts which realistically reflect the thrust of the evidence as a whole.’ The galbraith guidelines shouldbe followed by a coroner when deciding whether to leave a particular verdict to the jury.
Lord Woolf MR: ‘The conclusion I have come to is that, so far as the evidence called before the jury is concerned, a coroner should adopt the Galbraith approach in deciding whether to leave a verdict. The strength of the evidence is not the only consideration and in relation to wider issues, the coroner has a broader discretion. If it appears there are circumstances which, in a particular situation, where in the judgment of the coroner, acting reasonably and fairly, it is not in the interest of justice that a particular verdict should be left to the jury, he need not leave that verdict. He, for example, need not leave all possible verdicts just because there is technically evidence to support them. It is sufficient if he leaves those verdicts which realistically reflect the thrust of the evidence as a whole. To leave all possible verdicts could in some situations merely confuse and overburden the jury and if that is the coroner’s conclusion he cannot be criticised if he does not leave a particular verdict’.
Hobhouse LJ: ‘I also endorse the need for legal directions to be given to juries in a clear and easily usable form. The use of written directions should be further considered in any case which is not wholly straightforward. There is scope for a body such as the Judicial Studies Board to be invited to prepare and provide sets of standard directions which coroners could use in such cases’.
Lord Woolf MR, Hobhouse LJ
[1998] EWCA Civ 101, [1999] 1 All ER 344
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v HM Coroner for Inner London (ex parte Lisa Douglas-Williams) Admn 31-Jul-1997
. .
Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina on the Application of Mullholland v HM Coroner for St Pancras QBD 7-Nov-2003
The applicant sought to re-open a coroner’s inquest. The deceased had been drunk, slipped banged his head and fallen to the ground. Police and ambulance were called. The ambulance worker was not told he had been unconscious, and he was taken to the . .
Cited – Regina (Anderson and Others) v HM Coroner for Inner North Greater London QBD 26-Nov-2004
The deceased suffered depressive mental illness, and was detained outside on a cold night naked and in a cannabis induced delirium. Because of his size, additional officers were called upon to assist restraining him. He was taken to hospital, but . .
Cited – Regina (Anderson and Others) v HM Coroner for Inner North Greater London QBD 26-Nov-2004
The deceased suffered depressive mental illness, and was detained outside on a cold night naked and in a cannabis induced delirium. Because of his size, additional officers were called upon to assist restraining him. He was taken to hospital, but . .
See Also – Regina v Inner London South District Coroner Ex Parte Douglas-Williams CA 30-Jul-1998
A coroner had the right not to leave all possible verdicts to a jury, even including one possibly supported by the evidence, where the overwhelming evidence pointed one way, and possible confusion of jury might be caused by leaving all verdicts to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Coroners
Leading Case
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.143579
