A parent of a child who had not the means of providing for the burial of the body of his deceased child was not liable to be indicted for the misdemeanour of not providing for its burial, even though a nuisance was occasioned by the body remaining unburied. ‘It is true that a man is bound to give Christian burial to his deceased child if he has the means of doing so; but he is not liable to be indicted for a nuisance, if he has not the means of providing burial for it. He cannot sell the body, put it into a hole, or throw it into the river; but unless he has the means of giving the body Christian burial he is not liable to be indicted, even though a nuisance may be occasioned by leaving the body unburied, for which the parish officer would probably be liable.’
Judges:
Lord Campbell CJ
Citations:
[1851] 2 Den 325
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Clarke v London General Omnibus Co Ltd 1906
The parent of an infant child who dies where the parent has the means to do so, has a responsibility to arrange and pay for the burial. . .
Approved – Regina v Gwynedd County Council ex parte B and Another 1992
The ambit of the 1980 act does not extend to regulating events arising after a child’s death. . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.195007