header-logo header-logo

Environmental protection—Pollution of controlled water—Approach to determining level of fine

05 March 2010
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

R v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2010] EWCA Crim 202, [2010] All ER (D) 222 (Feb)

Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, Moore-Bick LJ, David Clarke and Sweeny JJ, 19 February 2010

The Court of Appeal has laid down sentencing principles for environmental offences.

Jonathan Barnard (instructed by Ashfords) for the defendant. Mark Harris and Howard McCann (instructed by the Environment Agency) for the Crown.

The defendant company was incorporated in April 1989. It was the largest supplier of water and sewage services in the UK. It was regulated by a number of agencies including the prosecutor in the instant case, the Environment Agency. In September 2007, during the course of cleaning out tanks in one of its plants, the defendant released sodium hypochlorite into the river Wandle. Damage was extensive. The defendant paid or pledged a total of £500,000 compensations. It admitted an offence of causing polluting matter to enter controlled waters, contrary to s 85(1) of the Water Resources Act 1991. The judge held that the starting point

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll