header-logo header-logo

11 July 2013
Issue: 7568 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Inquest

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Assistant Deputy Coroner for Inner North London [2013] EWHC 1786 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 269 (Jun)

The deceased died after ingesting a radioactive isotope. His wife and children, and UK and Russian government bodies were accorded the status of properly interested persons (the PIPs) in the defendant coroner’s inquest. The secretary of state sought judicial review of part of the coroner’s decision which rejected his claim for public interest immunity over documents. The issue for determination was whether the PIPs should be interested parties in the judicial review. The court held that, although the PIPs were interested parties under CPR Pt 54, there were cogent reasons for not adding them as interested parties in the judicial review proceedings. It was an established principle that an inquest was a fact-finding exercise and there were no parties, there was no indictment, there was no prosecution, there was no defence, there was no trial, simply an attempt to establish the facts. It was an inquisitorial process. Further, that a person was

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll