header-logo header-logo

A different view?

04 November 2010 / David Branson
Issue: 7440 / Categories: Features , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

David Branson explores the differences between criminal & civil liability for health & safety

In health and safety law there is both civil and criminal liability, and in both cases a general liability and a specific one. In criminal law the general liability exists under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA 1974), which imposes duties on the employer to ensure the health and safety of employees. The specific liability lies under the various subordinate regulations, such as the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/2306) (the regulations) which looks mainly at machinery guarding issues. In civil law the general liability lies under the common law tort of negligence, as originally set out in the case of Wilson & Clyde Coal v English [1938] AC 57, [1937] 3 All ER 628, while the specific liability lies under an action for breach of statutory duty, using the same subordinate legislation as exists for criminal law.

The nature of liability can be seen as either fault-based or strict. Fault–based liability

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
back-to-top-scroll