header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
18 June 2021 / Alistair Spencer
Issue: 7937 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Burial disputes: Dead & buried?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
51265
Alistair Spencer outlines the law underpinning & resolving burial disputes
  • Ownership of a body.
  • Ownership of ashes.
  • Intervention of the court in burial disputes.
  • Location of the burial.

The changing nature of society has led to disputes regarding funerals and the burial/cremation of bodies becoming more prevalent. The increase in second and third families, more dispersed families and more complex family relationships are some of the factors behind what appears to be an increase in disputes regarding bodies.

The death of a family member can bring out hidden rivalries and differing views as to the deceased’s wishes on a number of areas including funeral and burial arrangements, particularly if the deceased did not clearly set out their intentions.

Ownership of a body

When it comes to burial disputes the question of ownership of the deceased’s body often arises.

It was established in the case of R v Sharpe (1857) 21 JP 86 that the ‘law recognises no property in a corpse’. This was later cited in

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll