header-logo header-logo

14 May 2021 / Mark Pawlowski
Issue: 7932 / Categories: Features , Property , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust: property rights in body parts

48976
Mark Pawlowski considers whether English law recognises property rights in a dead body or bodily parts
  • English and Commonwealth caselaw on the recognition of dead bodies, body parts and bodily products as ‘property’.

The general rule is that when a human being dies, property in their body does not vest in anyone, although certain persons have duties, and thus rights, with respect to it. In Williams v Williams (1882) 20 Ch D 659, at p664, Kay J stated: ‘The law of this country recognises no property in a corpse’. It is for this reason that testamentary directions with regard to the disposal of one’s corpse (‘I wish to be cremated and my ashes scattered . . .’) are, at best, precatory.

In Dobson v North Tyneside Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 474, the Court of Appeal confirmed the orthodox view that, subject to certain limited exceptions, there is no property in a dead body under English law. The case concerned a

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll