Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2026
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0261, written 6 May 2026. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 6 May 2026 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2026-0261 |
| Deceased | Peter Gurney |
| Coroner | Penelope Schofield |
| Coroner area | West Sussex, Brighton and Hove |
| Source | judiciary.uk record |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS REGULATION 28 OF THE CORONERS (INVESTIGATIONS) REGULATIONS 2013 Please do not include any living persons’ names in this document, in accordance with the Chief Coroner’s PFD Publication Policy (2026). 1. CORONER I am Penelope SCHOFIELD, Senior Coroner, for the coroner area of West Sussex, Brighton and Hove. 2. DATE OF REPORT 06 May 2026 3. 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. 4. THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO Secretary of State for Defence Ministry of Defence Whitehall London SW1A 2HB You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by July 01, 2026. I, the coroner, may extend the period if an appropriate application is made. 5. YOUR RESPONSE 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. I have a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner. In accordance with the Chief Coroner’s Publication Policy, you should send me any representations regarding publication of your response. These representations should be made at the same time as the response is provided. I will pass any representations received to the Chief Coroner for a decision. Please note any links to webpages included in the response will not be checked for sensitive information prior to publication, as the information is already online. The names of those who do not respond to PFD reports are regularly published on the Chief Coroner’s webpages Non-responses to Prevention of Future Death (PFD) reports - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. 6. SUMMARY OF CORONER’S CONCERN The MOD is aware that there are current concerns around the possible link between exposure to Nitrobenzene and other explosives and bladder cancer. The has been no warning provided to either active or past employees who were actively involved in dealing with explosives devices, and who have been subject to such exposure, that they should consider getting tested. 7. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion unless action is taken to address the above concerns then there is a significant risk of future deaths and I believe each of you have the power to take such action. 8. INVESTIGATION AND INQUEST On 29 September 2025 I commenced an investigation into the death of Peter Edwin Spencer GURNEY aged 93. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 06 May 2026. The conclusion of the inquest was a narrative conclusion namely "Mr Gurney died of heart failure contributed to by other co- morbidities including terminal bladder cancer." 9. CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH On the 19th September 2025 Mr Gurney had an unwitnessed fall in the garden of his home address. This fall is believed to have been from standing height and caused by heart failure. He was found by his neighbour unresponsive. Paramedics attended and Mr Gurney was sadly pronounced deceased at the scene. Mr Gurney had a known history of falls and co-morbidities, including terminal bladder cancer diagnosed in November 2024. Mr Gurney had had a distinguished career serving in the Army and the Metropolitan Police as an explosives officer. During this time he had been exposed to Nitrobenzene and other explosives. However it remains unclear as to whether or not this exposure was linked to his bladder cancer. 10. CORONER’S CONCERNS During the course of the inquest I heard evidence giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows: The MOD is aware that there are current concerns around the possible link between exposure to Nitrobenzene and other explosives and bladder cancer. The MOD has been aware of this for some time. Evidence heard at the Inquest was that neither active nor past employees, who have been subject to this exposure through their work , have been warned to get tested. Unfortunately by the time Mr Gurney realised he had bladder cancer the disease had taken hold and it had become inoperable. 11. COPIES AND PUBLICATION OF THIS REPORT I have a duty to send a copy of my report to every Interested Person who in my opinion should receive it. I also may send a copy of the report to any other person who I believe may find it useful or of interest. I can confirm I have sent the report to: The family of Mr Peter GURNEY MOD Inquest Unit I also have a duty to send a copy of the report to the Chief Coroner. You may make representations to me, the coroner, about the publication of the contents of this report in line with Chief Coroner’s PFD Publication Policy (2026). Any representations will be sent to the Chief Coroner alongside the report. Please refer to box 4 above for additional information relating to the publication of reports and responses. 12. SIGNATURE Penelope SCHOFIELD Senior Coroner for West Sussex, Brighton and Hove
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 TO A REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS REGULATION 29 OF THE CORONERS (INVESTIGATIONS) REGULATIONS 2013 Please do not include any living persons’ names in this document, in accordance with the Chief Coroner’s PFD Publication Policy (2026). THIS RESPONSE IS BEING SENT TO: The Senior Coroner, Penelope Schofield, for the Coroner Area of West Sussex, Brighton and Hove, in response to a ‘REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATH REGULATION 28’ following an inquest into the death of MR PETER GURNEY that concluded on 06 MAY 2026. 1. RESPONDENT In line with our duty under Regulation 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013, provides this response within 56 days (plus any extension granted) of the date of the Report to Prevent Future Deaths. , Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, 2. DATE OF RESPONSE: 3. CONFIRMATION OF CORONER’S MATTERS OF CONCERN The MATTERS OF CONCERN were identified in the report are as follows: The MOD is aware that there are current concerns around the possible link between exposure to Nitrobenzene and other explosives and bladder cancer. The MOD has been aware of this for some time. Evidence heard at the Inquest was that neither active nor past employees, who have been subject to this exposure through their work , have been warned to get tested. Unfortunately, by the time Mr Gurney realised he had bladder cancer the disease had taken hold and it had become inoperable. 3. DETAILS OF ACTION TAKEN, how has the concern been addressed. [If no action is proposed please explain why here]. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) takes the welfare of our veterans extremely seriously and closely monitors any emerging issues that may be of consequence to this community. Any actions taken by the MOD must be based on robust evidence. The MOD’s current assessment, based on extensive discussions with our medical experts and in line with NHS/NICE guidelines, is that there remains insufficient evidence to establish a causal link between bladder cancer and occupational exposure to nitrobenzene in Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) personnel, and further research is required. In line with established national screening guidance, the MOD does not consider it appropriate to indirectly or directly promote medical testing for bladder cancer in EOD personnel, in the absence of clear supporting evidence. Screening for cancer can carry risks including false positives leading to unnecessary interventions, or false negatives providing a false sense of reassurance. There are also risks of significant anxiety caused to recipients of any warning, irrespective of whether they decide to get tested. The MOD therefore should not encourage people to get tested for bladder cancer without strong evidence. Irrespective of whether individuals perceive they are at high risk or not, they are advised to seek medical advice through their primary care provider should they experience any symptoms associated with bladder cancer such as blood in the urine. Symptomatic patients presenting to Defence Primary Healthcare providers would be investigated in line with NHS and NICE guidance. I am assured that current EOD personnel are protected by established policies designed to mitigate against exposure to hazardous substances. This includes nitrobenzene, which is no longer widely used in this field. I have also been assured by EOD leaders that there is widespread awareness of this issue among the veteran community and that personnel have been warned of nitrobenzene’s toxic nature since at least 1993. While the MOD does not confirm any risk of cancer, the 2025 study has raised the issue to over 2,000 EOD veterans. EOD seniors remain in close contact with the author of this study and are alert to any further developments in this field. The question of occupational causation has been referred to the Independent Medical Expert Group (IMEG) which is currently developing its expert medical advice. It is expected to identify areas where further research is required. The MOD will continue to monitor emerging evidence and will keep its position under review in light of any new findings. 4. DETAILS OF FURTHER ACTION PROPOSED Please note that any links to webpages included in the response will not be checked for sensitive information prior to publication, as the information is already online. As above, the MOD has referred the matter to IMEG for further consideration. Future action will be determined by IMEG’s advice and any other evidence that emerges in the medical literature. SIGNATURE
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Penelope Schofield, 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.