header-logo header-logo

25 March 2016 / David Branson
Issue: 7692 / Categories: Features , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

End of a century (Pt 1)

001_nlj_7692_branson

In the first of a two-part series, David Branson reports on the end of a century old overlap between civil & criminal liability in health & safety

The implementation of s 69(3) of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 now means that persons injured at work are no longer able to sue in respect of a breach of the employer’s statutory duties under health and safety regulations. As such, this has ended a century old overlap between civil and criminal liability in health and safety, whereby the same safety regulations provided for an action by both an injured party and the regulatory authorities.

There is now a clear split between civil and criminal liability in this area. Civil liability is effectively based on common law negligence, stemming from the principles laid down in the leading case of Wilsons and Clyde Coal v English [1938] AC 57, [1937] 3 All ER 628, and then developed in subsequent cases. There still remains a limited ability to claim under statutes such as the Occupiers 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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll