Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

James Holgate

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0004, written 3 Jan 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report3 Jan 2024
Reference2024-0004
DeceasedJames Holgate
CoronerLorraine Harris
Coroner areaEast Riding and Hull
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (2) 

NOTE: This form is to be used before an inquest. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1. The Minister for Health – 

1 

CORONER 

I am Miss Lorraine Harris, Area Coroner, for the coroner area of East Riding of 
Yorkshire and City of Kingston Upon Hull. 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice 
Act 2009 and Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 
2013.  

3 

INVESTIGATION 

On 2nd November 2023 I commenced an investigation into the death of James 
Arthur HOLGATE, aged 89 years. The investigation has not yet concluded, and 
the inquest has not yet been held. 

Mr HOLGATE’s medical cause of death has been given as: 
1a   Traumatic Intracranial Haemorrhage 
1b   Fall 
2    Mitral Valve replacement (on warfarin), Hypertension, Atrial Fibrillation, 
Frailty 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

On 30th October 2023 Mr HOLGATE age 89 years was admitted to Hull Royal 
Infirmary with recurrent falls, progressive confusion, slurred speech and 
progressive decline. 
While in the care of the Emergency Department Mr HOLGATE sustained a fall.  A 
CT scan showed evidence of a traumatic head injury, Mr HOLGATE was deemed 
very unwell and not for surgical intervention.  Mr HOLGATE deteriorated further 
and another  CT scan showed an ongoing bleed with mass shift which had not 
been evident on the original CT.  Mr HOLGATE was reviewed again and still 
deemed not fit for intervention and placed on a palliative care pathway.  Mr 
HOLGATE died on 1st November 2023. 

5 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

 
 The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  –  

This matter was referred to this court and is a case where it is entirely suitable 
to proceed to inquest without the need for a post mortem examination.  
Evidence regarding the cause of death will be provided at inquest by way of a 
statement from the treating clinician with the CT scans showing the sequence of 
events. 
The family indicated that it had been Mr HOLGATE’s wishes, and indeed 
something that they supported, for his body to be donated for medical 
science/research. 
This process has long been a way of researching illness and disease as well as 
assisting in the training of doctors.  It is recognised as fundamentally important 
to progressing the understanding of medicine and treatment. 

Each receiving medical research/training establishment have a criteria, one of 
which is that, unless there are exceptional circumstances, the deceased should 
not have undergone a post mortem examination.  This is understandable, and 
exceptions allow in certain instances this to be waivered. 

In Mr HOLGATE’s case the local medical research/training establishment had full 
capacity and were unable to accept him.  As is normal the family/Coroners 
Officer were referred to an alternative establishment at Nottingham. 

Nottingham politely declined, they indicated that they were prevented from 
accepting due to what appears to be an anomaly in the law.  As the matter was 
subject of a coronial inquest they could not accept the donation. 

In non-inquest matters reported to the coroner, where post mortem 
examination is not required and the coroner is content there is no requirement 
to investigate further, a form A is signed to indicate this and the coroner is then 
able to return the deceased back in to the care of their family/personal 
representative/funeral director to allow funeral arrangements or body donation 
to proceed.  In these instances medical research/training establishments are 
able to accept donation. 

Where a coroner is likely to hold an inquest in a situation where a post mortem 
is not necessary as a cause of death statement can be obtained and the coroner 
is content that there is no further need to retain the deceased for any further 
examination, the coroner must also ensure that the deceased is returned back 
to the care of the family/personal representative/funeral director as soon as 
practicable.  This normally allows for funeral arrangements to proceed.  

In both instances the coroner authorises release of the deceased, in majority of 
cases the person is cremated ie  they will not be available nor required for the 
coroner, even when the matter is proceeding to inquest.  All relevant enquiries 
have to be made and sufficient evidence obtained before the release is 
authorised. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It is surprising therefore that the medical research/training establishments are 
stating that they are prevented from accepting people that are to be the subject 
of an inquest due to the Human Tissue Act.  I fully accept there may be some 
circumstances where it would be inappropriate however if the coroner has no 
reason to object then the fact that the death is the subject of an inquest should 
not prevent the donation. 

On reading the legislation, the establishments are either indicating an anomaly 
in the law or interpreting it incorrectly and guidance may be required. 

Human Tissue Act 2004 covers donation. Section 11 covers permission required 
from a coroner, it reads: 
11  Coroners 

(1)Nothing in this Part applies to anything done for purposes of functions of a coroner or 
under the authority of a coroner. 
(2)Where a person knows, or has reason to believe, that— 
    (a)the body of a deceased person, or 
    (b)relevant material which has come from the body of a deceased person, 
  is, or may be, required for purposes of functions of a coroner, he shall not act on authority 
under section 1 in relation to the body, or material, except with the consent of the coroner. 

However the medical research/training establishments refer to section 1(3) of the act 
which explicitly states the body cannot be accepted unless the death has been 
registered.  Section 1 Subsection (3) HTA states: 

1  Authorisation of activities for scheduled purposes 

1(3)The use of the body of a deceased person for the purpose of anatomical examination 
shall be lawful if done— 
    (a)with appropriate consent, and 
    (b)after the death of the person has been registered— 
        (i)under section 15 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953, or 
        (ii)under Article 21 of the Births and Deaths Registration (Northern Ireland) Order 1976. 

Matters that proceed to inquest are not registered until the close of the 
inquest.  Some inquests are dealt with in a very timely manner, however some 
may take some months to conclude. 

It appears that the consent in Section 11 may have the ability to override the 
consent required in Section 1(3), if it is then organisations are not interpreting it 
this way. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion urgent action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I 
believe you  have the power to take such action.  

This may be by way of clarification or guidance if S11 overrides the need to 
register before acceptance. 

Donations of this kind further the advancement of medicine, treatments and 
training and as such prevent many deaths.  It appears that those people who 
are subject of an inquest should not be prevented from donating their bodies 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 when the coroner is content it is entirely appropriate to do so and it is the 
wishes of those making the arrangements. 

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this 
report, namely by 28th February 2024. I, the coroner, may extend the period. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, 
setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action 
is proposed. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following 
Interested Persons – the family of James Arthur HOLGATE. I have also sent it to 
The Royal College of Surgeons who may find it useful or of interest. 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.  

The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or 
summary form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he 
believes may find it useful or of interest. You may make representations to me, 
the coroner, at the time of your response, about the release or the publication 
of your response by the Chief Coroner. 

9 

[DATE]     3rd January 2024                                      [SIGNED BY CORONER] 

                                                                                       Lorraine Harris

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Department of Health and Social Care (PDF)
OFFICIAL 

From Maria Caulfield MP  
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State  
Department of Health & Social Care  

39 Victoria Street  
London  
SW1H 0EU  

Miss Lorraine Harris, Area Coroner, for the coroner 
area of East Riding of Yorkshire and   
City of Kingston Upon Hull Coroner’s Service,   
The Guildhall  
Alfred Gelder Street  
Hull HU1 2AA  

26 March 2024  

Dear Miss. Harris,   

Thank you for your letter of 3 January 2024 about the death of Mr. James Arthur Holgate. I am 
replying as Minister with responsibility for sponsorship of the Human Tissue Authority.  

Firstly, I would like to say how saddened I was to read of the circumstances of Mr. Holgate’s 
death, and I offer my sincere condolences to their family and loved ones. Your report describes 
the circumstances in which Mr Holgates body was declined for donation because it was 
subject to an inquest.  I am grateful to you for bringing this matter to my attention.   

In this case, the research establishment could have accepted Mr. Holgate’s body for lawful 
storage if certain conditions had been met. The research establishment could have lawfully 
stored the body in anticipation of potentially using it for anatomical purposes, as per section 
1(2) of the Human Tissue Act.   

However, Section 11 of the Human Tissue Act 2004 provides that any of the activities specified 
under section 1 of the Act should not take place where a person knows or has reason to 
believe that the body is, or may be, required by a coroner unless the coroner consents.   

The Department appreciates that the need for coroners’ consent in section 11 of the Human 
Tissue Act could allow room for confusion with regards to the criteria for storage and use of a 
deceased body for anatomical purposes under Section 1, particularly where a coroner is 
holding an inquest but has released the body. We propose therefore to discuss with the 
Human Tissue Authority how they can ensure that their guidance and codes of practice provide 

OFFICIAL 

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
          
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 OFFICIAL 

clarity on the criteria required for the storage and use of bodies with regards to each of the 
specified activities as set out in Schedule 1 of the Human Tissue Act 2004, including 
anatomical examination, and its interaction with Section 11.   

Lastly, I agree that body donation is a vital resource for training healthcare professionals and 
for research. I would recommend that for any further concerns relating to statutory 
interpretation of the Human Tissue Act, that you write to my officials at the Department of 
Health and Social Care (health.ethics@dhsc.gov.uk).  

I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.  

Best Wishes,  

MARIA CAULFIELD  

OFFICIAL

Related reports

Other reports by Lorraine Harris

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.