header-logo header-logo

05 March 2018
Issue: 7784 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Controversy over ‘cab rank’ burials

The Chief Coroner, Judge Mark Lucraft QC has taken the unprecedented step of backing a judicial review against his colleague’s decision to apply a ‘cab rank rule’ to burials.

The ‘cab rank’ approach ignores religious concerns for early burial—Jewish and Islamic beliefs require the deceased to be buried on the same day as death or as soon as possible thereafter. Instead, no one burial can be given priority over another.

Judge Lucraft’s name has been added to the legal action, which will be heard by a Divisional Court at the end of this month, and he has publicly criticised the decision, by Senior Coroner for Inner North London, Mary Hassell, as ‘over rigid’, ‘unlawful’ and in breach of Art 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects religious beliefs.

Hassell made the rule change in October 2017. The judicial review is being brought by the Adath Yisroel Burial Society.

However, Stephen Evans, chief executive of the National Secular Society, expressed support for Hassell. He said grieving families had regularly exerted pressure on Hassell’s officers to release bodies, leading her to make the rule change.

In a letter to the Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chancellor in January, he said: ‘By prioritising those who give religion as their reason for a quick burial, those who want rapid burials for other reasons are being unfairly treated. I trust you will ensure that the judicial response to this matter is not unduly influenced by those who shout the loudest.’

Doctors report deaths to coroners for various reasons, for example, where the death was sudden and unexplained or violent or where the deceased was not seen by a doctor during their final illness. The coroner may decide a post-mortem is needed to discover the cause of death. After this, if the cause is still unknown, they may hold an inquest.

Issue: 7784 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll