header-logo header-logo

Corporate manslaughter fines could force firms out

13 December 2007
Issue: 7300 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

News

Plans to fine first-time offenders up to 10% of their annual turnover for corporate manslaughter offences could force companies to leave the UK and move their headquarters elsewhere, if enacted, lawyers say.
The Sentencing Advisory Panel has drawn up proposals—currently out for consultation—which would see fines of 2.5%–10% of average annual turnover imposed for an offence of corporate manslaughter. When sentencing for an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 involving death, meanwhile, the fine range would be 1%–7.5% of average annual turnover.

Gerard Forlin, barrister at 2-3 Gray’s Inn Square, says: “This is of fundamental importance to organisations operating in the UK and some may reflect on continuing to have their major headquarters here.”
He says the proposed fines—which would be in line for those imposed for competition offences—cannot rely on a deterrent effect since “some people working in very dangerous environments feel they cannot do much more”.
Forlin believes this could be the final straw which, on top of high taxes, terrorist threats, high workforce costs and more, forces companies to move their UK bases.

However, Jeff Zindani, managing director of Forum Law, argues that the fine range is unlikely to have much of a deterrent effect on companies but “demonstrates yet again the weakness of this legislation”.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
back-to-top-scroll