What this means
Start with the exact decision in front of you.
A pre-inquest review can organise scope, witnesses, disclosure, expert evidence, Article 2 issues and hearing arrangements. It should be prepared as case management for the inquest, not as a substitute disciplinary or negligence trial.
Immediate priorities
Organise the position before responding.
Read the agenda and identify the rulings actually requested
Prepare a proposed issue and witness list with reasons
Record any parallel investigation that may affect evidence or dates
Detailed guidance
The procedure, evidence and possible route from here.
01
Turn the PIR agenda into a decision list
Rule 6 permits a pre-inquest review hearing at any point before the inquest. The current Bench Guidance describes it as an administrative case-management hearing, commonly used for complex investigations or contested legal issues. Read the agenda and prepare a table showing each decision sought, the proposed position, supporting authority or evidence and any other interested person's stated view. Typical subjects include status, scope, Article 2, a jury, witnesses, experts, disclosure, special measures, hearing length and listing.
Bench Guidance says an agenda should usually reach interested persons at least two weeks before the hearing, with relevant disclosure supplied early enough for informed submissions where possible. If the agenda or bundle arrives late, identify the decision that cannot fairly be addressed and the minimum step required; do not object generically. Submit proposed issues and directions in a usable form. A PIR is not the occasion to determine contested witness credibility or rehearse the final evidence before it has been gathered.
- List every ruling or direction sought at the PIR
- Tie each proposal to evidence and the statutory inquiry
- Raise a specific consequence of any late disclosure
02
Define scope without turning the inquest into another trial
Section 5 requires findings about who died and how, when and where the death occurred; where necessary to avoid a Convention breach, “how” includes the circumstances in which the death occurred. Scope is the set of issues and evidence reasonably needed to answer those questions. Propose a neutral issue list, relevant date range and witnesses or expertise required for each issue. Separate a factual dispute capable of affecting the conclusion from wider background that may be important to an employer but unnecessary for the coronial determination.
The coroner decides scope and must investigate sufficiently and fairly, but an inquest does not determine a named person's criminal liability or civil liability. Nor should scope be expanded simply to create a platform for a possible prevention report. If a policy, staffing decision or professional act is said to matter, explain the route by which it may have caused or contributed to the death. That disciplined link also helps prevent a later regulator from receiving an ambiguous criticism untethered to evidence.
- Draft a neutral issue list with a defined date range
- Link each proposed witness or expert to an issue
- Keep liability and unrelated governance questions outside scope
03
Convert rulings into an evidence plan
During the hearing, keep a live note of the coroner's oral rulings, reasons, disclosure dates, witness decisions and reserved questions. Compare it with the formal order or minutes when circulated and flag any material difference promptly. Assign each direction to a named owner and include time for record collection, witness review, expert questions and secure disclosure. Where a regulator, police body or employer holds needed material, state what has actually been requested and whether the coroner's compulsory power is sought.
Parallel proceedings do not create an automatic right to adjourn the inquest. Any sequencing proposal should identify the concrete risk: prejudice to a criminal case, unavailable evidence, inconsistent compulsory demands or a date on which another decision is expected. At the same time, tell the regulator or employer only what the PIR has decided, avoiding phrases such as “the coroner has accepted the allegation” when the ruling merely set scope. Revisit the issue matrix after every material direction so preparation follows the case the coroner will hear.
- Record rulings, reasons, owners and dates
- Explain any requested adjournment with a concrete dependency
- Update other bodies using the PIR's exact procedural status
Key questions
Keep the analysis tied to this stage.
The factual and legal scope of the inquest
Which witnesses and experts are necessary
What directions are needed before the final hearing
Advice is provided only by the regulated firm that accepts a matter.
Common questions
Clarifying the route without assuming the outcome.
Will the pre-inquest review decide whether a professional is at fault?
Ordinarily no. A PIR manages the investigation and resolves procedural or legal issues. Final factual conclusions follow the evidence at the inquest, within the limits of coronial jurisdiction.
What should a professional prepare for the PIR?
Prepare concise positions on the agenda, a proposed issue and witness list, identified disclosure gaps, realistic directions and details of any parallel process that creates a genuine timing or evidence problem.
Connected guidance
Continue through the topic map.
Use the hub for the full sequence or choose the connected route that matches the notice.
Official sources
Check the material for this question.
Sources checked 19 September 2026. Rules change, so compare the current notice and linked official material and tell the operator if a citation or summary needs correction.