Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Practical aspects to assessing competence in children
Rebecca Stevens, Partner, Royds Withy KingThis is an article regarding the practical aspects to assessing competence in children. The article explores a range of practicalities, such as meeting a...
Scrumping the crop of recent pension decisions
Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Conduct in financial remedies – when is it now a relevant consideration?
Rachel Gillman, 1 GC/Family LawThis article provides an overview of all aspects of financial misconduct following the recent decision of Mostyn J in OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52, wherein all aspects of...
The treatment of RSUs/Stock Options in light of XW v XH
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
View all articles
Authors

CORONER/ADMINISTRATION: Scotching v Birch

Sep 29, 2018, 17:09 PM
Slug : scotching-v-birch
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 18, 2008, 11:26 AM
Article ID : 87107

(Chancery Division; Patten J; 18 March 2008)

After the birth of the child, the couple's relationship broke down. The father eventually issued contact proceedings. The mother failed to attend a family court hearing, and shortly afterwards was found unconscious, having killed the child and attempted to kill herself. Because the parents, who had an equal interest in the child's estate, could not agree as to the burial arrangements for the child, the coroner refused to release the child's body without a court order. The father sought the grant of letters of administration, arguing that the mother was prohibited from applying for a grant of letters of administration on public policy grounds, in that she was not entitled to benefit from the estate of a person she had unlawfully killed. The mother argued that her right to respect for family life, under European Convention on Human Rights, Art 8, meant that she was entitled to apply for a grant of administration.

The mother's rights under Art 8 did not override the well-established and validated rule that a person should not benefit from her crimes. The mother could not apply for a grant of letters of administration; the letters of administration would be granted to the father, who was also entitled to a declaration that he was entitled to the child's body.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from