No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 July 2008
Requests for exhumation are increasing. Home Office licences appear to be more easily granted than heretofore. Consistory Court applications have multiplied, as witness the case notes in this Journal, and both the Chancery Court of York in Re Christ Church, Alsager and the Arches Court of Canterbury in Re Blagdon Cemetery have given judgments on appeal. Significant articles have appeared in this Journal from Rupert Bursell and Philip Petchey.
1 Re Christ Church, Alsager [1999] Fam 142, [1999] 1 All ER 117, [1998] 3 WLR 1394. 17 CCCC No 19, (1998) 5 Ecc LJ 214, Ch Ct of York.Google Scholar
2 Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299, [2002] 4 All ER 482, [2002] 3 WLR 603, 21 CCCC No 21, (2002) 6 Ecc LJ 420, Ct of Arches.Google Scholar
3 ‘Digging up Exhumation’ 5 Ecc LJ 18.Google Scholar
4 ‘Exhumation Reconsidered’ 6 Ecc LJ 122.Google Scholar
5 For details of the authorisation, see Common Worship: Pastoral Services, p 403.Google Scholar
6 As in Re Talbot [1901] p 1, London Cons Ct. noted by Bursell and Petchey in the articles referred to in notes 3 and 4 above.Google Scholar
You have
Access