High Court orders fresh inquest into 1994 death

Introduction

The High Court has ordered a fresh inquest into the death of Mr Anthony Joseph Whittle, overturning the original inquest held in 1995. The decision came after the court found that the original inquiry was insufficient and left many questions unanswered, particularly regarding the circumstances surrounding Mr Whittle's death.

The Substantive Application

The application for a fresh inquest was made under section 13(1)(b) of the Coroners Act 1988. Mr Christopher Whittle, the deceased's brother, argued that the original inquest did not adequately investigate the circumstances of Mr Whittle's death. The Attorney General granted a fiat for the application on 5 January 2024, allowing the case to proceed to the High Court.

The Original Inquest

The original inquest, held in February 1995, recorded an open verdict, stating there was no evidence to determine how Mr Whittle came to be found under a bridge. Mr Whittle, who had a history of paranoid schizophrenia, was admitted to a psychiatric unit shortly before his death. The inquest did not sufficiently explore whether he was effectively detained and the measures taken by the hospital and police following his disappearance.

Grounds for Application

The claimant argued that the original inquest failed to address key issues, such as the risk Mr Whittle posed to himself, whether he required formal detention under the Mental Health Act, and the actions taken by hospital staff and police. These omissions, it was argued, necessitated a fresh inquest to serve the interests of justice.

Submissions and Decision

The defendant, HM Coroner for North West Wales, supported the application for a fresh inquest, acknowledging the insufficiency of the original inquiry. The court agreed, noting that a new inquest was necessary to address unresolved questions and provide a full examination of the circumstances surrounding Mr Whittle's death.

Procedural Challenges

Despite agreeing on the need for a new inquest, the case faced procedural challenges. The claim form was not issued within the required timeframe, leading to delays. The court ultimately extended the time for service of the claim form, recognising the importance of a fresh inquest in the interests of justice.

Conclusion

The High Court's decision underscores the importance of thorough and comprehensive inquests, particularly in cases involving vulnerable individuals. The new inquest will aim to provide clarity and address the unanswered questions left by the original inquiry.

Learn More

For more information on medical negligence, see BeCivil's guide to Medical Negligence.