header-logo header-logo

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

Corporate manslaughter fines could force firms out

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

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll