Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Explosive end to crematorium

John Lichfield
Tuesday 22 December 1998 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A FRENCH court ordered an 82-year-old widow to pay pounds 13,000 to a crematorium that was wrecked when a heart pacemaker exploded during the cremation of her husband's body.

The deceased man's doctor was ordered to pay another pounds 26,000 in damages for failing to warn the crematorium that the body contained the device.

Experts told the court, in Grenoble, that the chemicals in the pacemaker's battery exploded with the force of two grams of TNT - enough to fire a 16lb artillery shell at a speed of 60mph. The furnace at the crematorium, at Gieres, near Grenoble, was extensively damaged by the blast. The widow signed a form on which she was asked whether there was a pacemaker in her husband's body. She ticked the box that said "No", even though the device had been fitted onlyeight months earlier. The doctor did not check whether a pacemaker was in place.

After six years of legal wrangling, the court decided both were negligent but took into account the age and emotional state of the widow at the time. She was ordered to pay one-third of the damages and the doctor - who has since retired - two-thirds.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in