header-logo header-logo

13 June 2025 / Tom McNeill , Olivia Dwan
Issue: 8120 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

The bright side?

222348
The collapsing criminal justice system might return proportionality to health & safety enforcement decisions, argue Tom McNeill & Olivia Dwan
  • Underfunding in the criminal justice system is resulting in enormous delays and the collapse of thousands of trials.
  • One result of this is that health and safety regulators may be forced to take a more proportionate approach to enforcement, and to focus on breaches that create the most serious risks.
  • Serious offences will still risk prosecution. For businesses, early and effective engagement is essential to ensure the best possible outcome.

When the Robens review of workplace health and safety concluded in 1972, the consensus was clear: criminal proceedings are not appropriate for the ‘generality’ of offences arising under health and safety legislation, and should be reserved for ‘flagrant, wilful or reckless’ breaches. The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 followed, replacing prescriptive regulations with a general duties approach, and creating the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

The approach to enforcement has evolved over time. In the mid-1990s,

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll