![AC-2024-LON-003241 - [2025] EWHC 3014 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png){kind=logo}
The prospects of success
The prospects of success
I address the prospects of success in greater detail below. For present purposes, it is sufficient to note that this is an extremely challenging application, brought in circumstances in which the highly experienced legal team representing the family at the Inquest had advised that there was no arguable claim. The premise of the claim is that notwithstanding a detailed ruling reached after hearing full legal submissions from all interested parties, a highly experienced criminal judge either misunderstood the conventional Galbraith test of which she has had a lifetime’s professional experience, or that she misapplied it.
- Heading
- Introduction
- The legal context to the Inquest
- Article 2 inquests
- The roles of the Coroner and the Jury
- Challenges to a coroner’s Galbraith decision
- The course of the Inquest
- The Ruling
- The application for an extension of time
- The applicable legal principles
- Analysis and conclusion
- Is there a reasonable excuse for the delay?
- The importance of the issues
- The prospects of success
- Would an extension of time cause substantial hardship or prejudice to the defendant or any other party or be detrimental to good administration?
- Mrs Rizvi’s Grounds
- Did the Coroner ask herself the right question?
- Did the Coroner inappropriately gloss the test for an Article 2 operational breach?
- The criticism of the Coroner’s findings as to the “off the record” conversation and the offer of a lift
- Ground 2
- The authorities on the treatment of causation in coroner’s inquests
- What acts or events were “in play” at the Inquest?
- Ground 2: conclusion
- Conclusions