header-logo header-logo

Penalty hike for health & safety?

20 November 2014
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Proposed sentencing guidelines will lead to “great consternation” in certain sectors

Proposed sentencing guidelines for health and safety and corporate manslaughter could result in companies paying 10 or 15 times existing fines and will cause “consternation” in boardrooms, a QC has warned.

The draft guidelines, published by the Sentencing Council and now subject to public consultation, cover corporate manslaughter, health and safety and food safety and hygiene offences. They introduce tougher penalties for more serious offences, using turnover as a base for calculation, for example, a company could face a fine of up to £10m for a fatal health and safety conviction. Large organisations found to have committed corporate manslaughter could face penalties of up to £20m.

Gerard Forlin QC, of Cornerstone Barristers, who specialises in health and safety cases, says: “I’m not saying that lots of companies are going to leave the UK in response, but this will certainly cause great consternation inside certain boards and sectors.

“It looks like this could lead to penalties of 10-15 times the current level—up to £20m in the most serious corporate manslaughter cases and, for businesses with a turnover that very greatly exceeds £50m, penalties could go up to, say, £50m. I think this will lead to more contested trials, particularly for large organisations with reputational issues. For smaller organisations, it could well lead to more early disposal of cases by way of a basis of plea.

“Interestingly, it’s a 14-week consultation over Christmas. However, people can’t moan about this unless they respond. It further appears that these proposals in the main may become effective before the end of the year and will almost certainly in the meantime be brought to the attention of judges as being persuasive.”

The council said there was a lack of sentencing guidance for these offences other than corporate manslaughter and fatal health and safety offences, and that existing guidance covered organisations but not individuals. They are intended to cover a wide range of offences from rat infestations to a supermarket’s failure to recall faulty food products.

The consultation closes on 18 February 2015.

Issue: 7631 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll