Subject-Matter Index

Coroner. See Evidence—material supplied to Coroner. COURTS (Magistrate’s Court—Coroner)

Death certificate

admissibility in civil proceedings

death certificate completed after inquest generally admissible as evidence of death, but may be excluded if cause of death specified is disputed and fact of death otherwise demonstrable: Collas v. Peet (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR N [8]

Evidence

material supplied to Coroner

preferable that material supplied to Coroner prior to inquest restricted to statements to be led before inquest, not extraneous background material: Kirk v. Law Officers (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR N [23]

Judicial review

amenability to judicial review

in absence of statutory appeal provision, Royal Court has power to review decisions of Coroner as part of general jurisdiction to review decisions of inferior bodies—may quash verdict of inquest in appropriate circumstances: Kirk v. Law Officers (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR N [23]

Law applicable

modified version of English Coroners Rules 1984

Rules followed in Guernsey subject to necessary modifications, e.g. coroner’s jurisdiction vested in Magistrate’s Court and no jury used—also subject to “procedural aspect” of European Convention, art. 2(1) requiring expansion of Coroners Rules, r.36(1)(b) to give narrative verdict determining not “how” but “by what means and in what circumstances” death occurred when deceased in custody of agents of state (e.g. in prison)—r.42 still precludes determining matters of criminal or civil liability: In re Schofield (Magistrate’s Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 353

Material supplied to Coroner. See Evidence—material supplied to Coroner

New inquest

factors to be considered

in absence of statutory appeal provision, Royal Court may quash verdict and order new inquest if verdict based on evidence later discovered to be unfounded—in interest of impartiality, may order new inquest to be heard before different Coroner: Kirk v. Law Officers (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR N [23]

Verdict

admissibility in civil proceedings

inquest verdict and findings not admissible in civil trial even as prima facie evidence of cause of death: Collas v. Peet (Royal Ct.), 2000–02 GLR N [8]

narrative verdict

“procedural aspect” of European Convention, art. 2(1) requires expansion of Coroners Rules, r.36(1)(b) to give narrative verdict determining not “how” but “by what means and in what circumstances” death occurred when deceased in custody of agents of state (e.g. in prison)—“circumstance” relevant to death to bear causal relationship to death—may record acts or omissions but to avoid determining or suggesting criminal or civil liability: In re Schofield (Magistrate’s Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 353

short verdict

short verdicts, e.g. “accidental death” or “natural causes” normally satisfactory—inappropriate if procedural aspect of European Convention, art. 2(1) requires narrative verdict to explain “by what means and in what circumstances” death occurred in custody of agents of state: In re Schofield (Magistrate’s Ct.), 2009–10 GLR 353