A patient suffering schizophrenia had been a voluntary patient. He was allowed to visit another unit within the hospital grounds, but then left altogether and was next found preparing to jump from Tower Bridge. He was taken by ambulance to Hospital but, left to wait, he again left, and a person of his description was seen shortly afterwards to jump into the river at St Katherine’s Dock and some weeks later his body was recovered from the river at Wapping. Mrs Takoushis applied for judicial review of the inquest. She said that the enquiry had been insufficient to satisfy the requirements of article 2 of the ECHR because the Coroner had refused to allow her to call expert evidence relating to the quality of care that her husband had received at the hospital prior to his death. The hospital took part in the proceedings as an interested party.
Held: The judge noted that the hospital had accepted that article 2 was engaged. In view of that it was not necessary for him to pursue that point.
Sir Anthony Clarke MR said: ‘Although the possible verdicts at an inquest under the 1988 Act are circumscribed and, in particular must not ascribe criminal or civil liability, that does not mean that the facts should not be fully investigated . .’
Judges:
Elias J
Citations:
[2004] EWHC 2922 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Coroners Act 1988, European Convention on Human Rights 2
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
Cited by:
Appeal from – Takoushis, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for Inner North London and others CA 30-Nov-2005
Relatives sought judicial review of the coroner’s decision not to allow a jury, and against allowance of an expert witness. The deceased had been a mental patient but had been arrested with a view to being hospitalised. He was taken first to the . .
Cited – Goodson v HM Coroner for Bedfordshire and Luton and Another (No 2) CA 12-Oct-2005
The applicant intended to appeal refusal of her challenge to the verdict of the coroner. For the first time at appeal she sought a protective costs order.
Held: The Corner House case established that a request for a protective costs order . .
Cited – Gentle, Regina (on the Application of) and Another v The Prime Minister and Another HL 9-Apr-2008
The appellants were mothers of two servicemen who had died whilst on active service in Iraq. They appealed refusal to grant a public inquiry. There had already been coroners inquests. They said that Article 2 had been infringed.
Held: The . .
Cited – Hurst, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v London Northern District Coroner HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant’s son had been stabbed to death. She challenged the refusal of the coroner to continue with the inquest with a view to examining the responsibility of any of the police in having failed to protect him.
Held: The question amounted . .
Cited – Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (MIND intervening) HL 10-Dec-2008
The deceased had committed suicide on escaping from a mental hospital. The Trust appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim that that they had been negligent in having inadequate security.
Held: The Trust’s appeal failed. The fact that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Coroners, Human Rights
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.221032