Jones v HM Coroner for Gwent & Anor

Jones v HM Coroner for Gwent & Anor

The application to reopen the inquest is refused because the change in the DPP's position does not constitute new evidence or a new fact under section 13, the Coroner's verdict was reached on proper consideration of evidence, and significant delay precludes reopening. The interests of justice do not require a fresh inquest.

Parties
Claimant: Nathan Jones; Defendant: HM Coroner for Gwent; Intervener: William Tudor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988 / Judgment on Application to Reopen Inquest
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Reopening Inquest, Gross Negligence Manslaughter, Judicial Review, Delay in Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathan Jones

Claimant

HM Coroner for Gwent

Defendant

William Tudor

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988 / Judgment on Application to Reopen Inquest

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence or new facts justify reopening the inquest under section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require a fresh inquest
  3. 3 Whether delay precludes reopening the inquest

Ratio Decidendi

The application to reopen the inquest is refused because the change in the DPP's position does not constitute new evidence or a new fact under section 13, the Coroner's verdict was reached on proper consideration of evidence, and significant delay precludes reopening. The interests of justice do not require a fresh inquest.

Court Disposition

Application refused