header-logo header-logo

25 February 2011
Issue: 7454 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Death knell for companies?

High fines anticipated for corporate manslaughter after first conviction

A company convicted of corporate manslaughter has been fi neda 116 per cent of its annual turnover. Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd (CGH) was fi ned £385,000 last week at Winchester Crown Court, after becoming the first to be convicted of the new off ence under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.

A geologist working for CGH died in 2008 when a trench he was working in collapsed. Th e company was found to have breached health and safety legislation and ignored industry guidance. The company director, Peter Eaton, was previously charged with gross negligence manslaughter and a health and safety off ence, but was ruled too unwell to stand trial.

Gerard Forlin QC, of 2-3 Gray’s Inn Square, who specialises in health and safety law, says: “This company had a turnover in 2008 of £333,000 and was fined 116% of that. It was given a relatively long time to pay—ten years with £38,500 due each year. “I think companies are going to sit up and listen, as fines potentially have to be paid within 28 days according to the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) guidance. In the context of its turnover, this is a high fine. If a fi ne of 116% were made against an oil company, large supermarket chain, bank or manufacturer then you can imagine the impact.

“However, each case willturn on its own facts and on the company’s ability to pay. I don’t think the court was sending out any particular message with this. It must be recalled that the SGC guidance set out the principles in any event.

“However, this case may well put the wind in the sails of the CPS and lead now to more prosecutions of larger organisations for corporate manslaughter.”

 Berrymans Lace Mawer LLP partner, Helen Devery says: “Although the fine is less than the starting point of £500,000 recommended by the SGC it will no doubt have a dramatic impact on a company of this size, refl ecting the trend towards harsher penalties.”

For more on this story see www.healthandsafetyatwork.com

Issue: 7454 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll