A mother who won the right to an inquest into the murder of her son faces a rare challenge by the Lord Chancellor.

Christine Hurst has already won the backing of the High Court and Court of Appeal for an inquest into the stabbing of her son, Troy, in 2000. But Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the Lord Chancellor, has applied to join today’s appeal to the House of Lords against that decision, arguing that if the ruling is upheld it will clear the way for dozens of old inquests to be reopened.

Mr Hurst, a decorator, was 39 when he was killed in May 2000 in Muswell Hill, North London. His neighbour, Albert Reid, stabbed him.

Mrs Hurst believes that her son’s death was entirely avoidable and that the police had failed to take steps to protect him, even though Reid had been the subject of 52 complaints about his threats and harassment and had a history of mental illness.

An inquest was opened soon after Mr Hurst’s death, but immediately adjourned under section 16 of the Coroners Act because Reid had been charged with murder. He was eventually convicted of manslaughter on July 16, 2001, and William Dolman, the coroner, had to decide whether there was “sufficient cause” to reopen the inquest. He declined, saying that the issues had been aired at the trial.

Mrs Hurst, 62, who lives in Brookmans Park, Hertfordshire, lodged a High Court challenge, insisting that the inquest was necessary to explore what she maintained were the systemic failings and in particular the lack of police protection that gave rise to her son’s death. Reid was known to the police, she said, having previously stabbed her former husband. She added: “If the police had acted, they could have saved my son’s life.”

She won first in the High Court and then again in the Court of Appeal, where the judges rejected appeals by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, the coroner and the London Borough of Barnet. The judges ruled that, when coroners exercised their discretion under the Coroners Act over whether to hold an inquest, they were bound by the duty imposed by the European Convention on Human Rights to investigate unexplained deaths.

Now Lord Falconer, whose department has responsibility for the coroners’ service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, has sought leave to intervene in the final appeal to the House of Lords. His lawyers argue that if Mrs Hurst wins then a large number of other inquests might need to be reopened, putting a strain on the system. They also argue that the issues “have far wider significance than the circumstances of the present appeal”.

Fiona Murphy, solicitor for Mrs Hurst, said that she had been trying since 2000 to establish the true circumstances leading to her son’s death. “She has been opposed at each stage by those state agencies that will likely be criticised in the event that she defends this appeal.”

Mrs Hurst said: “I am disgusted at this attempt by the Government. They have behaved appallingly. My son’s death was entirely preventable — and now they want to stop me ensuring that the failings that led to his death are publicly aired.”

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• The best legal yarns this Christmas
• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers