Annetts v McCann [1990] HCA 57

Annetts v McCann [1990] HCA 57

The Coroners Act 1920 W.A. did not exclude the rules of natural justice. Although the appellants had no general right to address the Coroner on the whole subject matter of the inquest, the Coroner misconceived his jurisdiction by treating his discretion to receive addresses as unfettered. Because the appellants' interests included the protection of the reputation of their deceased son, the Coroner was required to reconsider whether they should be heard and could not make or publish any finding or rider adverse to them or the deceased without first giving them an opportunity to be heard.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Judicial Review of a Coroner's Refusal to Hear Submissions at an Inquest / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Orders of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia set aside.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'right to Be Heard' 'coronial Inquest' 'mandamus' 'prohibition' 'legitimate Expectations' 'adverse Findings']
['administrative Law' 'coronial Law' 'natural Justice' 'judicial Review'] ['procedural Fairness' 'right to Be Heard' 'coronial Inquest' 'mandamus' 'prohibition' 'legitimate Expectations' 'adverse Findings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning Judicial Review of a Coroner's Refusal to Hear Submissions at an Inquest / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Coroner misconceived or exceeded his jurisdiction by refusing to hear submissions from counsel for the parents of the deceased.' 'Whether the Coroners Act 1920 W.A. excluded the rules of natural justice.' 'Whether the appellants were entitled to be heard before any finding or rider adverse to them or to their deceased son was made.' "Whether a person granted representation at a coronial inquest has a general right to address the coroner on all evidence or only on matters affecting that person's interests."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Coroners Act 1920 W.A. did not exclude the rules of natural justice. Although the appellants had no general right to address the Coroner on the whole subject matter of the inquest, the Coroner misconceived his jurisdiction by treating his discretion to receive addresses as unfettered. Because the appellants' interests included the protection of the reputation of their deceased son, the Coroner was required to reconsider whether they should be heard and could not make or publish any finding or rider adverse to them or the deceased without first giving them an opportunity to be heard.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Orders of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia set aside.

Orders

  • ['In accordance with the judgment of this Court, the first respondent reconsider the question whether the appellants should be heard in respect of any matters arising out of the inquest.' 'The first respondent not make any finding or publish any rider until he has reconsidered that question.' 'No order as to costs.']