Site icon Bindmans

Permission is granted by the High Court to review the decisions of the Senior Coroner for Blackpool who concluded that Art2 was not engaged when adjudicating on the death of Jacqueline Maguire – a woman with Down’s Syndrome in a case heard over 7 days

On 6 February 2019 the Administrative Court (Supperstone J) granted Mrs Maguire, the Claimant, permission to challenge by way of judicial review two decisions of the Senior Coroner for Blackpool and Fylde, taken at the conclusion of the inquest (July 2018) which he conducted into the death of the Claimant’s daughter, Jackie Maguire: these were the Coroner’s decision that Article 2 (the right to life) was not engaged and second, the Coroner’s decision not to leave the verdict of neglect to the jury.   

It was argued for Mrs Maguire, that the Coroner when taking the decision that Article 2 was not engaged, wrongly applied the law as set out in R (Parkinson) v HM Senior Coroner for Kent [2018] 4 WLR 106 to the effect that in ‘healthcare’/’medical negligence’ cases Article 2 is not engaged unless some kind of exceptional systemic failure can be demonstrated. This is wrong and a misunderstanding of the law.

The decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Lopes de Sousa Fernandes v Portugal (2018) 66 EHRR 28, adopted in Parkinson, made plain that different considerations arise in certain other contexts, in particular with regard to the medical treatment of persons deprived of their liberty, or of particularly vulnerable persons under the care of the state, where the state has direct responsibility for the welfare of these individuals. Jackie Maguire fell squarely within this definition.

As to the second decision, it was argued that the Coroner had wrongly failed to consider whether the various undoubted individual failings in care to Jackie  Maguire, by the various agents involved in her care -from the support workers, to the GPs, a paramedic crew attending and various doctors at the hospital, taken as a whole, were capable of being viewed by the jury as amounting to a serious failure to provide basic medical care to a vulnerable person. This was plainly a case in which there was sufficient evidence to leave the question of neglect to the jury.

The judicial review hearing is about to be listed and will highlight the failings in care to a very vulnerable woman, and the fact that the evidence shows that this is worryingly part of a much wider picture of neglect which should lead to an Inquiry if future lives are to be saved amongst this vulnerable group. The case law correctly applied shows that Art 2 was engaged and that there were several gross failings in care which could reasonably lead to a finding of neglect by the jury.

Carol Boys, CEO of the Down’s Syndrome Association said:

We are encouraged to hear permission has been granted  for a judicial review to look  at certain decisions made by the coroner at the inquest in to the death of Jacqueline Maguire who had Down’s Syndrome. The Down’s Syndrome Association has ongoing and serious concerns about the premature deaths of people with Down’s Syndrome. We very much appreciate the efforts of Saimo Chahal QC on behalf of Jacqueline’s mother, Mrs Muriel Maguire.

The Background Facts

Circumstances leading to Jacqueline Maguire (JM’s) death

Saimo Chahal QC (Hon) represents Mrs Maguire in the Inquest and the Judicial Review Claim. Jenni Richards QC is counsel, with Victoria Butler Cole and Nicola Kohn- 39 Essex Chambers.

Exit mobile version