header-logo header-logo

Proving it in reverse

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

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll