However some insurance companies will not pay out from any policies held in case the circumstances of the death makes the policy invalid, e. If police are investigating a death in suspicious circumstances, this may also delay distribution of an estate because a beneficiary will be disqualified if they are convicting of causing the death.
A coroner's officer will keep you up to date with what is happening. They will be aware that it can very difficult and frustrating when you are waiting for what seems like a very long time to find out what happened to the person who died and have things fully explained.
Often the coroner's officers are waiting for information from police, doctors or other investigatory agencies such as the Health and Safety Executive. A coroner's officer should contact you at least once every 3 months while you are waiting for the inquest to update you on the progress of the investigation.
If you need to call the coroner's officer for any reason, it is best to avoid first thing in the morning when the phones will be especially busy with new investigations being notified to them.
Please call the Registration service to find out is this service is available in your area. However, you will not receive the death certificates until after the inquest. Coroners decide who should give evidence as a witness, and witnesses are required by law to attend. Anyone who believes that they may have information that may help can offer to give evidence by informing the coroner.
If anyone believes a particular witness should attend, they should inform the coroner. Anyone with a legitimate interest is also allowed to question witnesses at an inquest, for example, relatives. The coroner must be made aware of anyone who believes they have a legitimate interest and the nature of their questions before the inquest. Possible outcomes include: natural causes; accident; suicide; unlawful or lawful killing; industrial disease and open verdicts where there is insufficient evidence for any other verdict.
Sometimes a coroner uses a longer sentence describing the circumstances of the death, which is called a narrative verdict. The coroner may report the death to any appropriate person or authority, such as the Health and Safety Executive if action is needed to prevent more deaths in similar circumstances. At the close of the inquest the coroner forwards information to the registrar of births and deaths to allow the death to be registered and the family can then purchase death certificates from the registrar.
This can be done by post if the family live at some distance from the registration office. Here's some more information on what to expect from a coroner's inquest. Co-op Legal Services offer specialist legal support for coroner's inquest representation.
The Chief Coroner has issued guidance about post-mortem examinations including second post-mortem examinations. The guidance sets out some considerations for coroners to assist in deciding whether to arrange a second post-mortem examination. It identifies that the coroner should carefully scrutinise any request for a second post-mortem and expect to be given reasons for the need for one.
The coroner in granting or refusing a request should give reasons for the decision. Where the report of the first post-mortem examination is not available before a decision has to be made on a request for a second examination, the coroner should do everything within their power to ensure that a preliminary report or summary conclusions from the first examination are made available at a very early stage.
This approach will allow an informed decision to be taken on whether a second examination is justified. In cases where the cause of death is not in issue, it is unlikely that a second post-mortem examination will be needed. The coroner should exercise careful judgment in respect of any request for a second post-mortem examination and should expect proper reasons to be given, pointing as appropriate to the likely issues in the prospective criminal proceedings.
The coroner should disclose a post-mortem examination report to a suspect, Rule 13 2 a of The Coroners Inquests Rules The coroner may refuse to provide the report where the document relates to contemplated or commenced criminal proceedings under Rule 15 d. Where there appears to be a genuine prospect of a prosecution for death by careless or dangerous driving then the police may indicate to the coroner that they would like the coroner to authorise a full forensic post-mortem examination which may amount to a second post-mortem examination if the coroner has already authorised a post-mortem examination.
In such cases, other than toxicology tests, there should be no need for a forensic or further post-mortem examination. This may merit further discussion between the CPS and the coroner in individual cases. Second post-mortem examinations in road traffic collision deaths should in practice very seldom be authorised by a coroner. Where a prosecutor is aware that a second post mortem has been carried out, they should liaise with the police to seek information about the outcome, it is possible that the second post mortem will be attended by the police and the first pathologist.
Where the prosecutor considers that the findings set out in the report about the second post mortem will be of relevance to their decision making and the coroner decides not to disclose the report, the prosecutor should consider asking for a meeting with the coroner.
The prosecutor should request the coroner to reconsider their decision about non-disclosure of the report. Prosecutors should note that, on a previous occasion, the CPS has challenged a coroner's decision not to disclose the report of a third post mortem examination.
This led to the CPS applying for a witness summons to be issued to require the coroner to surrender the report. At the hearing, it was agreed by the Judge and the CPS that the Coroner was not a compellable witness following the rule in Warren v Warren [ QB ], and the witness summons was discharged. Inquests are legal inquiries into the cause and circumstances of a death, and are limited, fact-finding inquiries; a Coroner will consider both oral and written evidence during the course of an inquest.
The Coroner's duty to hold an inquest is contained in section 6 of the Coroners and Justice Act Inquests are public hearings and can be held with or without juries - both are considered equally valid. Under Rule 8 of the Coroners Inquest Rules , Coroners are required to complete an inquest within 6 months of the date on which the Coroner is made aware of the death, or as soon as is reasonably practicable. An inquest will open to record a death, ensure the deceased is identified and for a body to be released for burial or cremation.
In more complex cases, the Coroner may also hold a pre-inquest hearing s , where the scope of the inquest will be considered, including possible timeframes and directions to be set. Pre-inquest hearings will usually be held in public except where it is in the 'interests of justice or national security', under Rule 11 5 of the Coroners Inquests Rules Categories of individuals identified as 'properly interested parties' can be found in section 47 of the Coroners and Justice Act Inquests will, in most cases, remain adjourned whilst criminal proceedings are being considered.
It is the Coroner's prerogative to resume an inquest following a criminal trial, but where an inquest does resume, its outcome conclusion or determination as to the cause of death, must not be inconsistent with the outcome of the criminal proceedings as outlined in paragraph 8 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act It is worth noting that the Coroner is under no obligation to hold an inquest solely in the public interest; an inquest will be held by a Coroner if the circumstances of the death fall under those offences listed in paragraph 1 6 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act There is no definitive list of conclusions available to a Coroner.
The following are those most commonly used:. The commencement of the provisions in the Coroners and Justice Act have added some further possible conclusions to this list:. The conclusion of unlawful killing is restricted to the criminal offences of murder, manslaughter including corporate manslaughter , and infanticide.
Cases where driving causes death may, therefore, only be regarded as unlawful killing for inquest purposes if they satisfy the ingredients for manslaughter gross negligence manslaughter or where a vehicle is used as a weapon of assault and deliberately driven at a person who dies murder or manslaughter depending on the intent.
In Maughan, R on the application of v Her Majesty's Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire [] UKSC 46 13 November the Supreme Court clarified that the standard of proof for suicide and unlawful killing in an inquest is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities and not the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.
This is because an unlawful killing verdict can now be reached on the balance of probabilities. However, where a decision is taken not to proceed with a prosecution following a verdict of an unlawful killing prosecutors should continue to provide a clear explanation for that decision. Rule 25 4 of The Coroners Inquests Rules requires a coroner to adjourn an inquest and notify the Director of Public Prosecutions, if during the course of the inquest, it appears to the coroner that the death of the deceased is likely to have been due to a homicide offence and that a person may be charged in relation to the offence.
Prosecutors may be present during inquest hearings where unlawful killing conclusions have been found, or may be contacted by bereaved family members, the police or the Coroner. Coroners or a jury may also deliver a 'narrative' conclusion which sets out the facts surrounding the death in more detail. This longer explanation will include the coroner's or jury's conclusions on the main issues arising in the surrounding circumstances of the death.
The Coroner is also not bound by the list of suggested conclusions above; this means that as long as the Coroner can form a conclusion which is concise and indicates how the deceased came by their death, a narrative verdict is acceptable.
The Coroner is unable to apportion any blame or civil or criminal liability of another individual as defined by section 10 2 of the Coroners and Justice Act Coroners will conduct inquests into a death where the deceased's body is lying in their district geographical 'jurisdiction' ; prosecutors should note the provision in the Coroners and Justice Act brought into force, by Commencement Order No.
Where a body has been washed ashore, the death will be investigated by the Coroner for that district; where multiple bodies have been washed ashore in different locations, the Coroners for those districts will agree between themselves that a 'grouped inquest' might be the best course of action.
Where a death has occurred aboard an aircraft, the Coroner residing within the district where the aircraft lands will hold the inquest, regardless of where the aircraft was located when the death occurred. A body returned from abroad will usually be dealt with by the Coroner in the jurisdiction where the body is to be buried or cremated. Coroners will also hold inquests where the death may have occurred abroad and the body is repatriated, and will usually take place in the jurisdiction where the deceased lived before their travel.
Where there has been destruction of a body - by fire for example - or where the body may be irrecoverable such as 'lost at sea' an inquest will be held as defined by section 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act The Coroner is required to apply to the Secretary of State for permission to hold an inquest, who will direct whether the Coroner should proceed; in these circumstances, the inquest will be treated as an inquest where body does not lie within the coroner's district.
The coroner has to provide evidence to the Secretary of State that a death has actually occurred; it is not sufficient for there to be a 'suspicion' of death, upon the disappearance of an individual for example, a leg washed ashore would not be sufficient to amount to a suspicion of death; however if a rib case or skull were to be found in the same circumstances, there is a stronger case of certainty of death.
The Coroner may also have to prove the body has been destroyed or lies in a place from where it cannot be recovered as well as meeting the criteria required for an inquest.
The Coroner will often sit alone to hear an inquest, but there are certain circumstances as defined by section 7 of the Coroners and Justice Act which place a requirement upon the Coroner to summon a jury to hear an inquest case:. The Attorney General, under the Coroners and Justice Act Consequential Provisions Order , has a public interest function independent of the Government, to decide whether to apply to the High Court for an inquest.
The Attorney can apply for an inquest to be held where either a Coroner had previously refused or neglected to hold an inquest where it ought to have been held, or, where an inquest has been held, and it is in the interests of justice that another inquest should be held. Examples include the Attorney's decision to request a new inquest for the victims that were killed at the Hillsborough Football Stadium in ; and, the decision not to apply for a new inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly, a government scientist.
The Attorney has no power to order a new coronial inquest; they can only be ordered by the High Court on an application made either by the Attorney General or by a third party with the consent of the Attorney General. However, before the application can be made, the Attorney has to be satisfied there is sufficient admissible evidence to persuade the Court of either of the two tests set out in section 13 the Order.
Article 2 inquests are enhanced inquests held in cases where the State or 'its agents' have 'failed to protect the deceased against a human threat or other risk' or where there has been a death in custody.
Cases where the deceased has been under the care or responsibility of social services or healthcare professionals are also often included in this category of inquest.
Article 2 2 is not confined to intentional killing but includes deliberate use of force which has the unintended consequence of causing loss of life.
This provision requires the State to take appropriate steps to safeguard life; where there are questions around this specific issue, it is likely that a Coroner will hold an 'Article 2' inquest. Inquests where the Coroner will consider whether a lack of care or common law neglect has led to the cause of death of the deceased are often termed as 'Jamieson inquests' and are based on the case of R v Coroner for North Humberside and Scunthorpe, Ex p Jamieson [] QB 1.
Prosecutors should note that in Jamieson, the Court of Appeal concluded that in cases where an individual has taken their own life, a conclusion of suicide will usually be recorded as opposed to lack of care or neglect that attributed to the individual committing suicide. Coroners will not normally use neglect or self-neglect to form any part of their conclusion, unless a clear and direct causal link is established between the conduct described, and the cause of death.
The involvement of the State was raised in this case when the inquest jury communicated to the coroner that an agent of the State in this case, the Prison Service had failed in its duty of care to the deceased.
The deceased had hanged himself in prison, and whilst he had been identified as at risk the proper safeguards were never put in place. Since Middleton there have been a small number of cases which illustrate other examples of State involvement and will be of interest to prosecutors. In R on the application of Christine Hurst v HM Coroner for Northern District of London [] EWHC Admin the deceased was killed by a man known to be violent and potentially mentally ill, and was someone he had given evidence against in eviction proceedings.
It was argued the police and local authority could have foreseen the incident and that it was preventable, as both bodies were aware the victim Hurst was in danger from his eventual killer Albert Reid convicted of manslaughter in Additionally, in Osman v UK 29 EHRR , had the authorities done all that was reasonably expected of them, they could have avoided the threat to the life of an individual of which they had, or ought to have had knowledge.
In this case the individual was known to the police and education authorities to have been harassing and threatening students and their parents; he went on to kill one of the student's parents and a teacher at the school.
In cases involving the State in this way, prosecutors may be called to give evidence on the role of the CPS at inquests and should comply with the coroner's request. The most typical scenarios include where there has been a CPS decision not to charge a suspect or where the prosecutor has not contested a bail application, and the suspect has subsequently killed the deceased.
Where an Article 2 inquest is linked to civil proceedings for example, litigation for damages , prosecutors should inform their line management and Chief Crown Prosecutor, or equivalent, to ensure the necessary steps are taken to handle the proceedings. Coroners may hold pre-inquest reviews or hearings in more complex cases, with the aim of assisting their inquest preparation.
There is no statutory authority or set procedure for the hearings; they are held in the same manner as an inquest — in an open court, and therefore in most instances open to the public , and will provide interested persons the opportunity to be present and to hear the relevant issues. There is no obligation for a prosecutor to attend these hearings, unless there is a business need to do so. Where suspicion arises that the deceased's death was caused by a criminal act, the Coroner will open an inquest, and then adjourn it until the conclusion of any criminal proceedings has been finalised, sine die without fixed date.
The CPS will be involved with Coroners' adjournments where there is cause to believe that the death of the deceased was as a result of:. These circumstances are all outlined under paragraph 1 6 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act The Act at Schedule 1 requires the Coroner to adjourn an inquest as follows:.
Coroners can themselves without external influence adjourn inquests pending a public inquiry as set out in paragraph 3 of Schedule 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act or under Rule 25 4 of the Coroners Inquest Rules Coroners are aware the CPS cannot initiate criminal investigations, and will provide the same material to the police.
The coroner can discharge this function under Rule 28 in two scenarios:. The coroner will seek to establish the medical cause of death by post mortem examination.
No, in most cases, a general practictioner or hospital doctor can certify the medical cause of death and issue the Medical Cause of Death Certificate. The death can then be registered with the Registrar of Births and Deaths. The registrar may refer deaths to the coroner if the cause shown is unacceptable or requires further inquiries. If a person dies of an expected illness and a registered medical practitioner has seen them during their last illness and within 28 days of the death, that doctor can issue a Medical Cause of Death certificate.
Covid Coronavirus. Coroner's Officer. FAQs about sudden death FAQs about sudden death procedures and inquests What is an inquest? The inquest is a factual inquiry to determine: Who has died When and where the death occurred How that person came by their death An inquest is not a trial, and the coroner does not apportion blame. When will a death certificate be issued?
When can the funeral be held? When can bodies be taken out of the Isle of Man? When can bodies be brought into the Isle of Man jurisdiction from abroad? Will the Coroner access the dead person's medical records?
0コメント