2002

Cases Reported

(1) R (Middleton) v HM Coroner for West Somersetshire and (2) R (Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and HM Coroner for West London	1
Issue: The procedural obligations of Art 2 European Convention, the right to life, in relation to deaths in custody.

R (Mumford) v (1) HM Coroner for Reading and (2) Home Secretary	21
Issue: Whether the coroner erred in not allowing a verdict involving neglect to be left to the jury in light of the requirements of Art 2 ECHR.

R (Lambourne) v HM Deputy Coroner for the District of Avon	25
Issue: Whether an inquest into a death in prison was adequate.

Edwards v UK	27
Issue: Whether Arts 2 and 13 ECHR were breached in the killing of a prisoner by another, who was mentally ill.

Treasa McShane v UK	48
Issue: Whether force used by the security forces during a riot gave rise to a violation of Art 2 ECHR; whether the investigations into the death satisfied the procedural obligation under Art 2; whether the RUC’s complaint to the Law Society about the applicant’s solicitor gave rise to a violation of Art 34.

Anguelova v Bulgaria	71
Issue: Whether there had been breaches of Arts 2, 3, 5 and 13 of the ECHR where a person had died whilst in police detention.

Douglas-Williams v UK (Admissibility Decision	93
Issue: Whether, where a violent alleged burglar had been repeatedly restrained by the police in a prone position, there had been violations of Arts 2 and 3 ECHR; whether the rejection by the jury of a possible verdict of unlawful killing deprived the inquest procedure of its effectiveness.

(1) Akenzua and (2) Coy v (1) Home Secretary and (2) Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis	102
Issue: Whether the representatives of a murder victim could maintain an action in misfeasance against the defendants for releasing the assailant from custody.

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Her Majesty’s Coroner for Inner London South District	109
Issue: Whether because of insufficiency of inquiry in an inquest of the discovery of new facts or evidence it was necessary or desirable in the interests of justice to hold another inquest; whether a coroner was able to appoint a deputy when the burden of a particularly complex inquest prevented the coroner from carrying out her other duties.

R (Green) v Police Complaints Authority and others	113
Issue: Whether a person who makes a complaint against police is entitled to disclosure of the statements obtained in the resulting investigation.

R (Syed) v HM Coroner for West Yorkshire (Western District)	129
Issue: Whether in the circumstances of a wholly misconceived application it would be just and equitable for the Legal Services Commission to bear the costs of the defendant.

Re Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission	130
Issue: Whether the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission had capacity to appear and make submissions concerning human rights if permitted or invited to do so by a court or tribunal.

HM Coroner for Wiltshire & Swindon v (1) Ministry of Defence and (2) The Family of Ronald Maddison (Deceased) (Interested Parties)	144
Issue: Whether in the light of new evidence gathered during a police investigation a further inquest should be held into the death of a serviceman in 1953 at the Porton Down chemical defence experimental establishment.

In the Case of AFP Berry	147
Issue: Whether the 3 month time limit for bringing an application for judicial review of an inquest ran from the date of receipt of a transcript of the inquest; whether the coroner had been right to decline to leave certain facts and verdicts to the jury.

R (Bloggs 61) v Home Secretary	151
Issue: Whether it was lawful to remove a police informant from the Protected Witness Unit into the mainstream prison system after he had received assurances from the police that he would remain in the PWU.

R (DF) v (1) Chief Constable of Norfolk Police and (2) Home Secretary	166
Issue: Whether a decision to refuse a prisoner admission into a Protected Witness Unit was lawful; the degree of immediacy of danger required in considering the risk.

Mastromatteo v Italy	182
Issue: Whether Art 2 was breached when a member of the public was killed by prisoners who had absconded from prison leave; whether the procedural requirements of Art 2 had been breached.