Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T23:16:43.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Re Bognor Regis Town Cemetery

Chichester Consistory Court: Hill Ch, 26 March 2024[2024] ECC Chi 3Atheist – mistaken burial– application for exhumation – Article 9 ECHR

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2024

Frank Cranmer*
Affiliation:
Fellow, St Chad's College, Durham, UK Honorary Research Fellow, Centre for Law and Religion, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mr Reid died in March 2023. He had been an avowed atheist all his life and was resolutely opposed to the practice of burial; but because he had lost touch with his family, those responsible for his funeral mistakenly arranged for him to be buried in the area of Bognor Regis Town Cemetery consecrated for the rites of the Church of England. When his family learned what had happened, they petitioned for a faculty for his exhumation.

Type
Case Note
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 2024

Mr Reid died in March 2023. He had been an avowed atheist all his life and was resolutely opposed to the practice of burial; but because he had lost touch with his family, those responsible for his funeral mistakenly arranged for him to be buried in the area of Bognor Regis Town Cemetery consecrated for the rites of the Church of England. When his family learned what had happened, they petitioned for a faculty for his exhumation.

The court noted that it was implicit from Aston Cantlow v Wallbank [2004] 1 AC 546 that a burial was an act of a public authority for the purposes of section 6(3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998, and it was therefore unlawful for burials to be conducted in a way which was incompatible with European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)– and the Consistory Court was itself a public authority. Article 9 ECHR protects:

… amongst other things, atheism, agnosticism and humanism. Accordingly, those individuals or institutions within the Church of England who are responsible for the solemnisation of marriage or the burial of the dead must act in a manner which is compatible with the principle of freedom of religion or belief, and must not discriminate on the basis of their religion in people's enjoyment of their rights …

In this case, there had been an understandable mistake. The local authority, the funeral directors and the officiant at the burial could not reasonably have known about Mr Reid's atheism and had acted entirely properly. Finally:

It is axiomatic that the requirement for reburial in consecrated ground is not applicable when the reason for the exhumation is that the Christian burial had been a mistake, incompatible with the important right to freedom of religion or belief. The family of Mr Reid are at liberty to have his body cremated and to deal with his ashes as they see fit.

The faculty was granted.