header-logo header-logo

Worth the wait?

16 August 2007 / Gerard Forlin
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Opinion , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

Ten years of wrangling have failed to settle the corporate manslaughter debate, says Gerard Forlin

After more than a decade of wrangling, bartering, debate and delay, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (CMCHA 2007) finally received Royal Assent on 26 July 2007. It will be brought into force by secondary legislation on 6 April 2008.

It has not previously been possible to pierce the corporate veil and successfully “convict” a large- or medium-sized organisation. With the advent of CMCHA 2007, it is highly likely that such organisations will now be realistically in the telescopic sights of the prosecution agencies after April 2008. In theory, CMCHA 2007 will not change the law regarding the prosecution of individuals (who are increasingly being imprisoned following conviction for manslaughter). The reality is, however, that as police investigations increase, more individuals will be caught up in the process, resulting in more arrests and more convictions.

CMCHA 2007 permits the jury to review the corporate culture inside an organisation and its general attitude to safety enforcement and control

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

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
The Ministry of Justice is once again in the dock as access to justice continues to deteriorate. NLJ consultant editor David Greene warns in this week's issue that neither public legal aid nor private litigation funding looks set for a revival in 2026
back-to-top-scroll