header-logo header-logo

12 March 2009 / Tim Horlock , Matthew Snarr
Issue: 7360 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury , Employment
printer mail-detail

Proving it in reverse

How has Chargot affected future prosecution practice? By Tim Horlock QC & Matthew Snarr

In R v Chargot Ltd [2008] UKHL 73, [2008] All ER (D) 106 (Dec) the House of Lords adjudicated on the burden that the prosecution bears in order to establish a breach of duty under ss 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work (etc) Act 1974 (HSWA 1974). In short, the issue turned on whether the prosecution merely needed to prove that a risk of injury existed or whether the prosecution needed to identify and prove particular acts or omissions which it was alleged gave rise to the breach of duty.

Factual background

On 10 January 2003 an employee, Mr Shaun Riley, of Chargot Limited, the first appellant, was fatally injured while driving a dumper truck. The second appellant, Ruttle Contracting Limited, was the principal contractor on site. The third appellant, George Henry Ruttle, was a director of Chargot Limited and the managing director of Ruttle Contracting Limited.

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll