Re Margaret Drake’s Application for Judicial Review [2026] NICA 17 (judgment here)

The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal has revisited a tricky question in inquisitorial proceedings: when the bereaved have obtained their own expert report for an inquest and decide against relying upon it, can the coroner compel its production?

As is often the case, the answer is fact-sensitive, but on the facts of this case the Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the judge below and quashed the Coroner’s refusal to revoke a notice requiring a family’s expert report to be provided to her.

Although this was a decision interpreting sections 17A and 17B of the Coroners Act (Northern Ireland) 1959, given the symmetry between the Northern Irish statutory scheme and coronial powers in England and Wales, it is still highly persuasive and so the principles applied require close analysis by inquest practitioners and coroners in England and Wales.

Commencing Thursday 15^th October 2026

The Centre for Contemporary Coronial Law at the University of Greater Manchester has announced that the highly successful Coronial Law ‘Short Course’ will be offered again, starting on Thursday, 15^th October 2026.  All (seven) sessions are conducted live via Microsoft Teams from 18:00 to 20:30.

Designed for practitioners working in, with, or aspiring to join the coronial service, the course blends clear legal foundations with practical, court-facing learning to build confidence and understanding in relation to coronial investigations and inquests.  It is ideal for legal representatives, hospital coronial liaison staff, coroners’ officers, those seeking coronial roles, newly appointed coroners, and others involved in the investigation of deaths and the inquest process.

Course Schedule:

• 15 October 2026
  Lecture 1 – Introduction and Outline
  Alan Wilson HM Senior Coroner, Blackpool and Fylde

• 29 October 2026
  Lecture 2 – Jurisdiction and Investigations
  Professor Christopher Dorries OBE Retired HM Senior Coroner, South Yorkshire West
• 12 November 2026
  Lecture 3 – Seminar / Case Studies
  Professor Christopher Dorries OBE Retired HM Senior Coroner, South Yorkshire West
• 26 November 2026
  Lecture 4 – Inquests (Part I)
  Rachael Griffin HM Senior Coroner for Dorset
• 10 December 2026
  Lecture 5 – Inquests (Part II)
  Rachael Griffin HM Senior Coroner for Dorset
• 14 January 2027
  Lecture 6 – Article 2 Inquests
  Timothy Brennand HM Senior Coroner, Manchester West
• 28 January 2027
  Mock Inquest
  Course Faculty

Course Details

• All sessions will be conducted live via Microsoft Teams from 18:00 to 20:30.
• The cost is £50 per individual session, or £300 for the complete course.
• Participants may book the complete course (seven sessions) or select individual sessions according to their professional interests.
• An employer invoice booking option is also available for organisations wishing to pay by invoice.

To Book Your Place click here:  Book the Coronial Law Short Course

LLM Coronial Law – October 2026 Intake

The Centre for Contemporary Coronial Law also has a small number of places remaining on its LLM in Coronial Law commencing in October 2026.

The LLM is designed for those wishing to develop a more advanced and specialist understanding of coronial law, practice and death investigation.

Further information about the LLM, including entry requirements and how to apply can be found here or by contacting the Centre using the same contact details below.

Contact Information

For further information about the Coronial Law Short Course or the LLM in Coronial Law please contact:

Dr Alicia Danielsson
Head, Centre for Contemporary Coronial Law
University of Greater Manchester

Email: CoronialLaw@greatermanchester.ac.uk

R v Foster [2026] EWCA Crim 1088, 7 August 2026 (judgment here)

This appeal case, considering the length of sentence for perverting the course of justice, should operate as a stern warning of how seriously criminal courts will view giving false accounts in anticipation of coronial investigations.

The Facts

Mrs Froggett, an elderly care home resident died from complications of a fractured femur after an unobserved fall from her wheelchair. The care home manager (a registered nurse), together with two care workers, created and maintained a false account that her wheelchair lap strap had been fastened when Mrs Froggett fell.

That false narrative was set out in documents produced in the knowledge that investigations by the CQC and coronial proceedings were likely to follow her death. It was also repeated in responses sent to the coroner, which went as far as suggesting that the deceased may have unfastened her lap belt herself and that the lap strap’s buckle had become defective or gone missing after the incident.

The deception came to light only because the participants were stupid enough to discuss their falsehoods in the presence of an honest staff member who properly reported the overheard discussions about the fabrication. Approximately six months later fresh accounts were produced admitting that the earlier statements had been false.  Indeed it seems that the lap strap had never even been capable of being fastened because the buckle was missing. Their false accounts had clearly included quite despicable victim blaming.

Protocol for Legal Professionals Wishing to Raise Concerns Informally About Judicial Behaviour.   8 July 2026

 Protocol for Legal Professionals Wishing to Raise Concerns Informally About Coroner Behaviour 22 July 2026

Following on from the Harman Review, the Lady Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals last week issued a new Protocol for Legal Professionals Wishing to Raise Concerns Informally About Judicial Behaviour. The document formalises what is said to be a practice that has existed for many years: the ability of lawyers to raise concerns about judicial conduct through informal channels rather than making a formal complaint to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (‘JCIO’).[1] 

The aim is straightforward enough. If a judge has a brief loss of temper or makes an ill-judged remark, advocates are encouraged either to raise it directly with the judge or to ask a leadership judge to have a quiet word.

Although the protocol expressly states that it excludes Coroners,[2] practitioners appearing in Coroners’ Courts, should not feel left out.  This  merely reflect the constitutional position of the coronial jurisdiction, sitting outside the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, rather than any principled non-application of the approach promoted in this guidance.  Indeed hot on its heels the Chief Coroner has now issued her own protocol for legal professionals about what to do when the bad behaviour is that of a Coroner. The Chief’s new protocol is intended to support a professional, respectful, and constructive working environment within the coroner service and to promote early resolution where it is appropriate.

R (Roome) v Senior Coroner for Gloucestershire & TikTok Info Tech UK Ltd. [2026] EWHC 1808 (Admin) 16 July 2026 – judgment here.

Social media is not just an important aspect of many people’s lives, but may also provide an important insight  into how they came by their death. This latest High Court judgment provides an illustration of how coronial investigations will have to adapt to a world in which crucial evidence may reside within social media platforms, messaging applications and digital ecosystems that were barely considered relevant in inquests only a few years ago.