coroner's inquests 

 

private client image 

 

The coroner occupies a unique role in English law. The office of coroner can be traced back over 800 years. The coroner’s inquest is unique because it is an example of the inquisitorial system of law in the English system. The coroner’s duty is to enquire as to the cause of the deceased’s death and the circumstances in which it occurred.

 

For the deceased’s family, the inquest is highly likely to be an entirely unfamiliar and daunting experience. Bereaved families will be faced with a detailed enquiry into personal and emotional events for which we believe they need careful and sensitive advice.

 

The inquest brings into contact legal professionals, medical professionals, the judicial office of the coroner and the family to analyse in detail events in the life of the deceased leading to their death. The inquisitorial nature of the proceedings means that, strictly speaking, there are no parties. There are therefore no ‘sides’ to advance cases and it is the coroner who leads the inquiry rather than holds a trial. Clearly, however, the stakes are high for all concerned. It is therefore important for clients to understand the benefits, strengths and limitations of the procedure.

 

The coroner is restricted from providing a verdict which would attribute either civil liability or criminal liability of a named person; those being determinations to be reached in the civil or criminal courts. Nevertheless, the fact-finding process and observations by the coroner can have a great effect on individuals or institutions whose actions may subsequently become the subject of criticism.

 

Click on the bookmarks below for more information:

 

 

For further information, please contact Alison McClure in the Clinical Negligence team on 023 8085 7345 or email alison.mcclure@bllaw.co.uk.

 

initial advice

 

Our experience is that families seek legal advice to understand the inquisitorial process and for representation at the inquest. In practical terms, we will ask:

  • has a formal complaint to the hospital or other medical professional already been made?
  • are medical records available?
  • has the coroner released any statements?
  • has the coroner released the post mortem report?
  • will the coroner need notifying that there is legal representation?

 

Assuming that the family would like legal representation, we notify the coroner as soon as possible. We request disclosure of any available documentation. This is then reviewed and we look at the scope of the inquiry envisaged. Generally, this means forming a view on the witness evidence and medical expert evidence which the coroner proposes to call.

 

The coroner has discretion as to what evidence is called. However, representations can be made in writing or at a pre-inquest hearing. We believe that representations and good communication should be established early with the coroner and his officers to avoid the possibility of procedural delays or adjournments dealing with evidential issues.

 

Having reviewed the documentation, we will advise in writing. We will ascertain the likely length of the inquest and the number of witnesses and experts to be called. This is important so as to prepare for the inquest but also so that we can advise on the likely cost of representation.

 

Many inquests are dealt with in half or sometimes a whole day. Usually, the coroner will give his verdict on the same day.

 

A few weeks before the inquest, we like to sit down with the family to meet them, discuss their concerns about the events, go through evidential details, discuss the procedures, give legal advice and deal with questions. We go through the documentation. We will then consider and advise as to the representation required, options available and costs.

 

back to top>>

 

funding

 

The general position is that legal aid funding for inquests is only available in ‘exceptional’ circumstances. Our experience is that this applies in only very few medical cases. If legal aid funding is available, this is most likely to be when the right to life under Article 2 of the Human Rights Act legislation is involved. Consequently, for most medical incidents, families will have to look at either:

  • private funding; or
  • legal expenses insurance

 

When looking at the costs, it is necessary to consider the following:

  • anticipated length of hearing
  • solicitor acting as advocate
  • barrister acting as advocate
  • instructing independent medical experts

 

In many cases where there may be a clinical negligence claim for compensation after the inquest the costs of the inquest can be included as part of the costs of investigating a clinical negligence claim and on that basis we may, in appropriate cases, be able to act under a conditional fee or ‘no win no fee basis’.

 

We are always happy to discuss the likely costs with clients and consider a range of helpful options. In general circumstances, particularly where there are young dependents, we may consider acting on a pro-bono basis.

 

back to top>>

 

hearing

 

For the family, the hearing is an intense and emotional experience. They will see the doctors who treated their relative giving evidence in the witness box and answering questions about that treatment.

 

Generally, we meet early before the hearing. Even if family members are not giving witness evidence, it can be an extremely stressful occasion. We believe that providing supportive and helpful guidance can at least help to ease some of those pressures.

 

The coroner leads the enquiries and the questioning. The venue and atmosphere of the inquest is that of the court room, although as stated earlier, it is not a trial. Depending upon the issues, the coroner may take evidence from a pathology expert either first or last and hear the other witnesses, usually the treating clinicians, accordingly.

 

After the coroner’s questions, the legal representatives, or if unrepresented, a spokesperson for the family, has an opportunity to question and cross-examine the witnesses. Care must be taken that the questions fall properly within the scope of the inquiry. Whilst the coroner will allow some questions relevant to liability to be put to the witnesses where they touch on the circumstances of the deceased’s death, he may be forced to disallow questioning which appears directly to invite a verdict making a ruling on liability.

 

All the evidence of the hearing is taped. A transcript can be obtained after the hearing, but there is a transcript fee payable to the coroner’s office for providing this.

 

Generally, the coroner will give his verdict on the same day. He will ask the legal representatives for their submissions and representations, usually before adjourning for a short while to consider and prepare his verdict. This is then read out by him in open court.

 

back to top>>

 

verdicts

 

The usual verdicts encountered are death due to natural causes, accident/misadventure or, infrequently, due to unlawful killing. Considerable significance is often placed by family members and representatives on the final short form verdict. However, it is important to realise that the verdicts are framed in terms of the cause of death and generally not so as to express a view on legal culpability.

 

a) narrative verdict

 

A coroner may choose to give a narrative verdict. Although standard descriptions may be used, the only requirement is that the coroner gives a clear and concise statement. Whilst these can be phrased neutrally, there is greater potential for actual or implied criticism of the actions taken in the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased.

 

b) neglect verdict

 

The coroner may find that a death has occurred because of neglect. Such a finding will have a powerful effect on any subsequent proceedings. Generally, under case law, certain criteria must be fulfilled for the coroner to make a ‘neglect verdict’. Classically, cases have concerned a failure to provide treatment at all to vulnerable persons. In the medical setting, cases concern clear/gross failures, perhaps a failure to observe basic medical monitoring procedures. Classically, there has to be a failure to provide treatment based on the patient’s condition as it appeared, for example, to the hospital staff. Now the test is what the staff should have known about the condition. It must be shown, on the balance of probabilities that:

  • but for the neglect, the deceased would have survived; or
  • the neglect significantly contributed to the deceased’s death

 

Although the purpose of the inquest is to examine the circumstances of the death, a verdict of neglect will mean that the family is in an extremely strong position if they then decide to bring civil proceedings.

 

back to top>>

 

Human Rights Act 1998

 

The Human Rights Act incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into English law. The relevant section is the right to life under Article 2. Earlier it was described that only in ‘exceptional’ circumstances would funding by legal aid be available. These are the types of case which may fall into this category. Examples of these situations would be when an individual’s life is directly dependent upon the state’s procedures, such as where lethal force is considered necessary from a police marksman. Other situations might concern the supervision of a suicidal prisoner who would, by definition, be under the care of the state.

 

Under Article 2, the state is under a duty not only to protect the right to life, but also to undertake a proper inquiry where there may have been a breach of that right. In these circumstances, the scope of the duty under ECHR may outweigh the usual restrictions on the scope of the coroner’s inquiry. This is to enable the state to fulfil its investigatory obligation. Examples of the implications of this approach will be:

  • where the coroner makes a verdict of death due to a ‘systems failure’ by the state’s systems and procedures to protect the right to life; and
  • where there is the need to avoid deaths from occurring in similar circumstances in the future

 

This is a complex and developing area of law. We are able to provide expert advice, drawing upon team working between clinical negligence and human rights law specialists.

 

back to top>>

 

summary

 

We believe that the coroner’s inquest is a great opportunity in the process of thoroughly investigating the medical circumstances of a patient’s death. It provides early disclosure in the form of witness statements from the relevant medical staff. Those staff are questioned in a public forum and have to answer the coroner’s questions.

 

Families are understandably anxious about this unfamiliar process. Even many experienced criminal and civil advocates will not have had the opportunity to attend that many inquests, unless they specialise in medical and/or human rights law.

 

We are able to offer experienced clinical negligence advice and advocacy services for coroner’s inquests. We can provide early cost effective assessment of cases and representation and support for families.

 

back to top>>