Farra is a death administration assistant for UK families. Get step-by-step guidance for registering a death, applying for probate, notifying banks, and managing bereavement admin. From essential documents to practical checklists, Farra simplifies estate paperwork and funeral-related tasks so you can focus on what matters.
There are two legal routes and two complaint routes. Under section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988, the High Court can order a fresh investigation — but only on an application by or under the authority of the Attorney General, so you must first ask the Attorney General for that authority. Judicial review is a different thing with a different test: a High Court challenge to the lawfulness of a coroner's decision or the conduct of an inquest, which must be brought promptly and in any event within 3 months. Separately, you can complain about how the investigation was handled, or to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office about a coroner's personal conduct — neither of which can change a conclusion.
If you believe a coroner has made an incorrect decision, reached the wrong conclusion, or conducted an inquest unfairly, you have legal options to challenge. However, challenges are difficult, expensive, and rarely successful. Understanding the grounds for challenge and the processes involved is essential before proceeding.
This page sets out what the routes are and what each one requires. It is not legal advice, and it does not tell you which route to take — that depends on facts we cannot see.
On numbers:
No official statistics are published on how many section 13 applications or judicial reviews of coroners are made, how many succeed, how long they take, or what they cost. Earlier versions of this page carried figures for all four. They were not drawn from any source and have been removed.
1. Application for New Inquest
When: After an inquest has concluded with a conclusion you believe is wrong or insufficient.
Process: Section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988 applies where the High Court is satisfied, "on an application by or under the authority of the Attorney-General", that the grounds are made out. So the first step is asking the Attorney General for authority — the fiat — to bring the application.
What the court can do: order an investigation under Part 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, by the same coroner or another in the same area; quash any determination or finding made at the earlier inquest; and order the coroner to pay such costs of the application as the court thinks just.
Deadline: section 13 sets none. That is one of the practical differences from judicial review, which has a three-month longstop.
2. Judicial Review
When: to challenge the lawfulness of a decision by the coroner — before, during or after an inquest. That can include a decision on the scope of the inquest, a refusal to hold one at all, procedural unfairness, or a conclusion no reasonable coroner could have reached.
Process: a claim in the Administrative Court, which first needs permission from a judge before it goes to a full hearing.
Deadline: CPR 54.5 requires the claim form to be filed promptly, and in any event not later than 3 months after the grounds to make the claim first arose.
3. Complaint to Chief Coroner
When: For concerns about how the investigation was conducted, delays, or coroner behavior.
Process: Write to the Chief Coroner outlining your concerns.
Outcome: Can result in guidance to the coroner, but won't overturn conclusions or order new inquest.
When: For serious complaints about the coroner's personal conduct.
Process: Submit formal complaint to JCIO.
Outcome: Can result in disciplinary action against the coroner, but doesn't change the inquest outcome.
The most common way to challenge an inquest conclusion:
Grounds for New Inquest
Section 13(1) sets out two situations. The first is where the coroner "refuses or neglects to hold an inquest or an investigation which ought to be held". The second is where an inquest has been held and it is "necessary or desirable in the interests of justice" that a further investigation should be held, by reason of:
- fraud
- rejection of evidence
- irregularity of proceedings
- insufficiency of inquiry
- the discovery of new facts or evidence
- or otherwise
The words "or otherwise" matter: the list is not closed. What the court has to be satisfied of is that a further investigation is necessary or desirable in the interests of justice.
The Application Process
- Legal representation: section 13 applications are technical, and most applicants are represented. Whether to instruct a solicitor is your decision.
- Gather evidence: Document why the original inquest was insufficient or incorrect.
- Draft application: Your solicitor prepares detailed grounds for the application.
- Ask the Attorney General: section 13 requires the application to be made by or under the authority of the Attorney General, so the first step is asking for that authority.
- Attorney General's decision: they consider whether to grant authority (the "fiat"). Granting it is not a ruling on the merits — the High Court decides those.
- High Court hearing: with authority granted, the application is made to the High Court.
- Decision: High Court decides whether to quash the original inquest and order a new one.
Success rates
No official statistics are published on how many section 13 applications are made or how many succeed. Earlier versions of this page gave annual figures for the Attorney General; they were not sourced and have been removed. The Attorney General's Office is the body to ask.
Timeline
No published figures exist for how long a section 13 application takes, or for how long a fresh inquest takes once ordered. For context, the Ministry of Justice puts the average time to process an ordinary inquest at 31.3 weeks in 2025, from the report of the death to the conclusion.
No official source publishes what a section 13 application costs, so this page does not estimate it. Two things are on the record:
Judicial review is a challenge to the lawfulness of what a coroner did. It is often used against procedural decisions, but a conclusion can be quashed too where it is legally flawed — the court is not reviewing whether it agrees with the outcome, but whether the coroner was entitled to reach it.
What Can Be Challenged
- Decision about scope of inquest (what should be investigated)
- Refusal to call particular witnesses
- Refusal to allow particular lines of questioning
- Decision not to hold an inquest when one was required
- Procedural unfairness during the inquest
- Failure to provide adequate disclosure of documents
Grounds for Judicial Review
You must show the coroner's decision was:
- Illegal: The coroner acted beyond their legal powers
- Irrational: No reasonable coroner could have made that decision
- Procedurally unfair: The process violated principles of natural justice
The JR Process
- Pre-action protocol: Write to the coroner explaining your challenge and seeking resolution.
- Permission stage: Apply to High Court for permission to bring judicial review.
- Permission decision: Judge decides if you have an arguable case.
- Full hearing: If permission granted, full hearing of the challenge.
- Judgment: Court decides whether to quash the decision and what should happen next.
Timing is Critical
Judicial review must be brought "promptly" and in any event within 3 months of the decision. Delay can be fatal to your case even if you have good grounds.
Judicial review carries significant costs risks:
For less serious concerns, the complaints process may be more appropriate:
Complaint to the Chief Coroner
When to use:
- Concerns about how investigation was conducted
- Unreasonable delays
- Poor communication
- Lack of family involvement
- Procedural concerns
Process:
- Complaints about how a coroner's office handled a case go first to the senior coroner for the area, or to the local authority that funds the service, depending on what the complaint is about
- The Chief Coroner's office can be written to about the conduct of coroner investigations
- No published service standard sets a response time, so we do not quote one
Outcome: Chief Coroner can provide guidance to coroners but cannot overturn decisions or order new inquests.
Complaint to JCIO
When to use:
- Serious misconduct by the coroner
- Inappropriate behavior
- Bias or prejudice
- Breach of judicial conduct standards
Process:
- Complete JCIO complaint form
- Provide detailed evidence of misconduct
- JCIO investigates
- Decision on whether disciplinary action warranted
Outcome: Can result in advice, warning, or in serious cases, removal from office. Doesn't change inquest outcome.
Local Resolution First
Before formal complaints, consider raising concerns directly with the coroner or senior coroner. Many issues can be resolved through direct communication.
Important factors to consider before pursuing a challenge:
Reasons to Consider Challenging
- Significant new evidence has emerged
- Clear legal error in the conclusion or process
- Important matters weren't investigated
- Procedural unfairness prevented proper examination
- Public interest in getting it right
- You can afford the costs and emotional toll
Reasons to Think Carefully
- Success rates are very low
- Costs are substantial (tens of thousands of pounds)
- Process takes many months or years
- Emotionally exhausting and prevents closure
- Even if successful, new inquest may reach same conclusion
- You simply disagree with the conclusion (not enough on its own)
Get Expert Advice
Consult with a specialist inquest solicitor who can objectively assess your prospects. Organizations like INQUEST can help you find appropriate legal advice and may be able to assess whether you have grounds for challenge.
Sometimes alternative approaches achieve better results than challenging the inquest:
Civil Litigation
If your goal is compensation for negligence or wrongdoing, civil litigation may be more effective than challenging the inquest. Civil courts aren't bound by inquest conclusions.
Criminal Prosecution
If you believe a crime was committed, report to police or CPS. They make independent decisions about prosecution regardless of inquest conclusions.
Professional Regulation
Complain to professional bodies (GMC, NMC, etc.) about professional conduct. They investigate independently of inquests.
Health and Safety Prosecution
Report workplace safety concerns to HSE. They can prosecute employers regardless of inquest conclusions.
Public Campaigns
If your goal is systemic change, public campaigning may be more effective than legal challenges. Prevention of Future Deaths reports already highlight systemic issues.
If you've decided to pursue a challenge:
Most challenges are unsuccessful. If your challenge fails:
What happens next: a refusal of permission for judicial review can sometimes be renewed or appealed, on advice. A refusal by the Attorney General to grant a fiat is not itself an inquest outcome. Ask your solicitor what, if anything, remains open.
Pursue alternatives: Consider civil litigation, professional complaints, or campaigning instead.
Seek closure: At some point, continuing to fight prevents healing. Bereavement counseling can help.
Channel energy positively: Some families find meaning in campaigning for systemic change rather than focusing on their specific case.
Before embarking on a challenge, understand these realities:
Scotland
Scotland has no coroners and no inquests, so section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988 does not apply and neither does anything else on this page. Deaths are reported to the Procurator Fiscal, and a Fatal Accident Inquiry under the Inquiries into Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths etc. (Scotland) Act 2016 produces a determination by a sheriff. A Scottish solicitor is the right source on what can be done about one.
Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland has coroners, but under the Coroners Act (Northern Ireland) 1959. Section 14 of that Act gives the Attorney General for Northern Ireland power to direct a coroner to hold an inquest where they have reason to believe a person died in circumstances that make an inquest advisable — a different mechanism from section 13 of the Coroners Act 1988, which does not apply in Northern Ireland.