R (Lawrance) v Hm Coroner for West Somerset
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE CRANSTON |
| Judgment Date | 10 April 2008 |
| Neutral Citation | [2008] EWHC 1293 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | CO/4995/2007 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 10 April 2008 |
[2008] EWHC 1293 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Cranston
CO/4995/2007
The Claimant appeared as a litigant in person
Ms Jerome (instructed by HM Coroner West Somerset) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
Miss Christine Lawrance is the claimant in this case. She has a deep sense of grievance about the circumstances surrounding the death of her father in 1999 and what happened subsequent to his death. In particular, she has instituted this judicial review to compel the coroner to conduct an inquest in relation to that death. She acted in person today and has explained to me that she does not have the resources to seek legal advice or assistance, although over the years since her father's death she has sought advice from various people.
She has prepared a number of documents for this hearing, and in particular a seven page summary of her case. She has also supplemented that today in her address to me. She tells me in the document about the background to her father's condition in the years leading up to his death. She was caring for her father, who had become blind and also had mental problems, and she tells me that she eventually obtained a protection order in relation to her father's affairs. In addition, she tells me that a social worker was assigned by her local authority to provide assistance, but he was, in her view, unhelpful or worse. She also tells me about the general practice at the Highbridge Medical Centre who were responsible for her father and she told me about one particular doctor in that practice, Dr Trow (now deceased) who she says, at least with hindsight, was, in her view, and to put it no higher, incompetent. She does have a document in her bundle where Dr Trow claims to be a member of the Royal College of General Practitioners and there is a letter from that Royal College saying that in fact Dr Trow was not a member. But I can make no findings about Dr Trow today.
In the document that Ms Lawrance has prepared for today, she tells me about the struggle she had in terms of looking after her father. Because of his medical condition he was not able to take painkillers which made it much more difficult to care for him. She also tells me that in fact she did not acquire the medical assistance which was necessary to deal with her father's problems. She does say, however, that her father was only suffering from sciatica and arthritis, although the arthritis in some respects was not insignificant.
As I say, her father died in 1999. Ms Lawrance found her father dead in his sleep and the doctor, Dr Edwards, gave the death certificate which is marked “myocardial infarction, ischemic heart disease”. It is then certified by Dr Edwards. As I understand it, ischemic heart disease is commonly known as a heart attack, which is a not uncommon form of death in our society.
Ms Lawrance tells me that she approached the police because of her concerns with the certified cause of death. The death was on 8th July on a Thursday and she saw the police the following Tuesday at 6.30 pm. They told her that it was a civil matter. She now says with hindsight that she wishes she had gone back to talk to the police more about the matter the following morning. She spoke to the vicar about what happened and the vicar said that, given her concerns, the funeral might have to be cancelled. In any event the funeral was held on Friday 16th.
The point, for present purposes, is that at this stage the coroner was not involved. That is relevant to section 8 of the Coroners Act 1988, which I shall come to shortly.
Ms Lawrance took me to an email which seems to come from Dr Trow and which, in as much as it can be deciphered, might suggest inconsistencies with the death certificate. In essence, Ms Lawrance's case is that her father did not die for the reasons set out in the death certificate but because of the incompetent —in fact as she puts it, grossly negligent —treatment of her father in the previous two years prior to his death.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R (Moss) v HM Coroner for the North and South Districts of Durham and Darlington
...2. (I should note in this connection that at paras 26-31 of his judgment in R (Smith) v Deputy Assistant Coroner for Oxfordshire [2008] Inquest Law Reports 44, [2008] EWHC (Admin) 694, Collins J expresses some doubts about the correctness of the approach of Richards J in Goodson and of the ......
-
Jordan’s Applications
...a presumption in favour of as full disclosure as possible, see R (Smith) v Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy CoronerWLR[2008] 3 WLR 1284, [2008] Inquest LR 44 and R (Bentley) v HM Coroner for Avon(2001) 166 JB 297, [2001] Inquest LR 205. 69. Gillen J held and I respectfully agree, that the Coron......
-
R (Ali Zaki Mousa and Others) v Secretary of State for Defence No 2
...in the inquiry. Reliance was placed on the observations of Collins J in R (Smith) v HM Deputy Coroner for Oxford[2008] ACD 45, [2008] Inquest LR 44 at para 37: ‘It may not always be necessary for there to be full disclosure to interested parties, in particular to the next of kin, of all rep......
-
R (O'Connor) v Avon Coroner
...in principle and that the inquisition should be quashed. A fresh inquest was ordered to be convened before a different coroner, [2008] Inquest Law Reports 44. The case raised two issues which, although academic in the light of the coroner's concession, were of general importance and hence w......