header-logo header-logo

Thames Water recieves record fine for pollution

14 January 2016
Issue: 7682 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

A water utility company has been fined a record £1m for polluting a canal in Hertfordshire.

The financial penalty imposed against Thames Water Utilities is the highest yet, and is part of a broader trend towards high fines as a result of new sentencing guidelines in July 2014.

St Albans Crown Court fined Thames Water last week for discharging polluted water from a sewage treatment works into the Grand Union Canal between July 2012 and April 2013. Thames Water pleaded guilty to two offences under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. Under the regulations, large companies with a turnover of more than £50m can expect a fine of between £7,000 and £3m.

Thames Water fully co-operated with the Environment Agency and has invested £30,000 in improved machinery to avoid a repetition of the offence.

Judge Bright QC, in his sentencing comments, reportedly warned that “the time has now come for the courts to make clear that very large organisations really must bring about the reforms and improvements for which they say they are striving”. Those who did not, he said, could expect to attract sentences “sufficiently severe to have a significant impact on their finances”.

Paul Sheridan, partner at CMS Cameron McKenna, says: “There is a discernible trend towards higher fines for environment offences. There appears to be an underlying principle that only by focusing on increasing the financial consequences of offending will due note be taken by senior directors, and notably the CEO and finance director.”

Issue: 7682 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

Gloucestershire firm boosts residential conveyancing team

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

Firm strengthens corporate team in Worcester with new hire

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

Weightmans partner appointed president of London Market Forum of Insurance Lawyers

NEWS
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
back-to-top-scroll