2014
|
|
Cases Reported |
| Re Jordan’s Applications | 1 |
| Issue: Whether, in the course of an inquest into the fatal police shooting of an alleged IRA member, the Coroner’s decisions related to the disclosure of documents or sitting with and managing the jury, were unlawful; whether a refusal of disclosure by PSNI was unlawful; whether a delay of more than 11 years in commencing the inquest breached the Applicant’s Art 2 ECHR procedural rights; whether part of the judicial review hearing should have been heard in private. | |
| Re Jordan’s Applications (Standing) | 63 |
| Issue: Whether the Coroner should be prohibited from participating as an adversarial party in judicial review proceedings and subsequent appeals. | |
| Re Jordan’s Applications (Merits) | 68 |
| Issue: Whether decisions made by the Coroner and the PSNI in the course of an inquest into the police fatal shooting of an alleged IRA member were unlawful. | |
| Brown v HM Coroner for Norfolk (Chief Constable of Norfolk as Interested Party) | 91 |
| Issue: Whether an inquest should be quashed and a fresh inquest ordered on the grounds that the inquest relied on mistaken facts. | |
| R (Litvinenko) v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs | 99 |
| Issue: Whether, where a PII certificate prevented an inquest from considering key relevant issues, the Secretary of State’s reasons for refusing a statutory inquiry into a death, provided a rational basis for that decision. | |
| R (Shaw) v HM Coroner for Leicester | 116 |
| Issue: Whether permission to appeal should be given to challenge the refusal to order a fresh inquest on the basis of alleged inadequacy of inquiry. | |
| R (Cooper) v HM Coroner North East Kent | 121 |
| Issue: Whether permission should be given to challenge a Coroner’s decision as to what verdicts should be left to the jury where that application was made before commencement of the Coroner’s summing up and the jury’s conclusion being returned. | |
| E7 (An Officer of the Metropolitan Police) v Holland (Chairman of the Azelle Rodney Inquiry) | 124 |
| Issue: Whether permission should be given to challenge the factual conclusions reached by an Inquiry and the approach adopted to analysing events in fractions of seconds. | |
| Hoyle v Rogers and Rogers (Secretary of State for Transport and International Air Transport Association as Interveners) | 135 |
| Issue: Whether the Judge at first instance was right to find that a report produced by the Air Accident Investigation Branch of the Department for Transport was admissible as evidence in civil proceedings. | |
| Re LP’s Application | 148 |
| Issue: Whether a witness was entitled to receive a copy of evidence she had given to the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry. | |
| Re McDonnell’s Application | 150 |
| Issue: Whether procedural orders granting witness anonymity and screening which had no impact on the inquest verdict could be challenged; whether following the verdict the Coroner was functus officio for the purposes of reviewing procedural orders. | |
| McDonnell v United Kingdom | 156 |
| Issue: Whether a 17 year delay in bringing a case to inquest breached the State’s Art 2 procedural obligations. | |
| R (HM Revenue and Customs) v HM Coroner for the City of Liverpool | 168 |
| Issue: Whether the powers in Schedule 5 Coroners and Justice Act 2009 bound the Crown. | |
| R (Plantagenet Alliance Ltd) v (1) Secretary of State for Justice, (2) The University of Leicester and (3) Leicester City Council | 178 |
| Issue: Whether the Secretary of State for Justice had a common law duty to consult widely as to how and where the remains of Richard III should be buried. | |
| Goldstein v HM Coroner Inner London North | 200 |
| Issue: Whether, where Art 9 ECHR was engaged, an injunction preventing an invasive autopsy should continue pending the results of a non-invasive autopsy being obtained. | |
| Bloom v Senior Coroner for the Western District of London (Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust, Spire Healthcare and others as Interested Parties) | 202 |
| Issue: Whether an inquest should be quashed following new medical expert evidence being available as to the mechanism and cause of death. | |
| James and James v HM Coroner for Surrey | 207 |
| Issue: Whether a fresh inquest into the death of an army recruit should be ordered in light of new evidence demonstrating inadequacies and flaws in the original inquest. | |
| Atkinson v Secretary of State for the Department of Energy and Climate | 209 |
| Issue: Whether a low level of asbestos not exceeding industry standards was sufficient to found a successful claim for compensation. | |
| Re Elam | 220 |
| Issue: Whether a fresh inquest into the death of an unidentified person should be ordered in light of new evidence as to the deceased’s identity. | |
| R (Birks) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis ((1) Independent Police Complaints Commission and (2) Rigg-Samuel as Interested Parties) | 221 |
| Issue: Whether the decision to refuse consent to resign to a police officer facing disciplinary proceedings was unlawful. | |
| Re HM Coroner County Durham and Darlington | 231 |
| Issue: Whether a fresh inquest should be ordered in light of new evidence which cast doubt on the Coroner’s conclusion of suicide. | |
| R (Duggan) v HM Assistant Deputy Coroner for the Northern District of Greater London (Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others as Interested Parties) | 232 |
| Issue: Whether an inquest jury had erred in concluding that the deceased, who was shot by a police officer, had been ‘lawfully killed’. | |
| Lynch and others v (1) Chief Constable of Warwickshire , (2) Warwickshire County Council and (3) Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust | 247 |
| Issue: Whether the costs associated with legal representation at an inquest were recoverable as the costs of a civil claim. | |
| R (Davey) v HM Coroner for Leicester City and South Leicestershire (University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust as Interested Party) | 260 |
| Issue: Whether the Coroner had erred in not exercising her discretion to empanel a jury under s8(3)(d) Coroners Act 1988. | |
| R (Delezuch) v Chief Constable of Leicestershire; R (Duggan) v Association of Chief Police Officers | 267 |
| Issue: Whether the 2014 College of Policing guidance for managing investigations into deaths following the use of police force was lawful. | |
View as
Sort by
Display
per page
