In this post, Alex Carington considers the Supreme Court’s decision in an appeal by the family of the Deceased who sought to challenge the Coroner’s decision that Art. 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998 did not require an expanded conclusion having heard all of the evidence at the inquest such that the jury were requested to return a short form conclusion only. The appeal also raised issues about the boundary of the systems duty and operational duty (and the content of both) as well as the boundary between the enhanced procedural obligation on one hand and basic procedural obligation together with the redress procedural obligation on the other.
Tag: Article 2 Inquests
Case comment: Dove v HM Assistant Coroner for Teesside and Hartlepool [2023] EWCA Civ 289
12KBW pupil Corinne Novell gives an update on this case and the outcome of the Court of Appeal hearing, in which challenges were brought with regard to Article 2 and seeking a fresh inquest.
Morahan v HM Assistant Coroner for West London
In this article, pupil Rebecca Henshaw discusses the recent appeal judgment in Morahan, which deals with the issue of when the enhanced investigative duty under Article 2 of the ECHR will be automatically engaged in an inquest.
R (Morahan) v HM Coroner for West London [2021] EWHC 1603 (Admin)
In this article, Ed Ramsay discusses the recent case of Morahan, which deals with the issue of when the enhanced investigative duty under Article 2 of the ECHR will be automatically engaged in an inquest.
R (on the application of Maughan) v Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire [2020] UKSC 46
In this blog Edward Ramsay and David Sharpe QC discuss the landmark appeal to the Supreme Court (‘UKSC’) which considered the appropriate standard of proof to be applied when determining coronial conclusions of suicide (and unlawful killing). By a majority, the UKSC dismissed the appeal, holding that the standard of proof for all conclusions at an inquest is the balance of probabilities.
Inquests and Inquiries Law Blog 