Hartshorne v Gardner
Where the parents of an intestate young man, who were jointly entitled to administer his estate, disagreed about where he should be buried, the court decided the question by reference to all the circumstances.
Facts
A young man died intestate, and his parents, who were divorced, were equally entitled to administer his estate and so to decide on the disposal of his body. They disagreed about where he should be buried, each wanting him buried near their own home. His body remained unburied while they were unable to agree, and the father applied to the court.
Legal principle
The court held that, where the persons entitled to deal with the body disagree, the court must decide, considering all the relevant circumstances, including the wishes of the deceased, the reasonable requirements and wishes of the family, the location with which the deceased was most closely connected, and the need for the body to be disposed of with all proper respect and decency and without unreasonable delay. Having considered these factors, the court decided where he should be buried. The case is one of several in which the courts have resolved disputes about burial.
Related cases on intestacy, personal representatives and administration of estates
- Re Benjamin [1902] 1 Ch 723
- Re Diplock [1948] Ch 465
- Ministry of Health v Simpson [1951] AC 251
- Official Solicitor v Yemoh [2010] EWHC 3727 (Ch)
- R (Ghai) v Newcastle City Council [2010] EWCA Civ 59
- Strong v Bird (1874) LR 18 Eq 315
- Williams v Williams (1882) 20 Ch D 659
Studying wills, succession and probate? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
