Latest news
- Petitioning creditors: Take care when considering offers
- Former tenancy arrears cannot be used as reason for refusing consent to mutual exchange
- Corporate manslaughter/deaths at work: Definitive sentencing guidelines published
- Getting service charge proportions right
- Contractors' relief at ruling they are not bound indefinitely by third party collective agreements
- Fit notes to replace sick notes from April 2010
See more Press releases
RSS news feeds
Home | News & events | Legal updates | Corporate manslaughter/deaths at work: Definitive sentencing guidelines published
Corporate manslaughter/deaths at work: Definitive sentencing guidelines published
10 February 2010
The Sentencing Advisory Panel (SAP), following extensive consultation over many months, has now published definitive guidelines for corporate manslaughter and health and safety offences where a death has occurred.
The guidelines are only intended to apply to organisations and not to the sentencing of individuals.
For the guidelines to apply, the prosecution must prove that the breach was a significant cause of death and not simply that death occurred.
Turnover
The SAP now recommends that fines are not linked to a percentage of turnover.
A court should not only look at both turnover and profit, but also at a defendant's assets. The circumstances of each defendant organisation and the financial consequences of the fine will vary from case to case and could lead to companies structured in different ways attracting fines that are vastly different.
Tariff
The guidelines come close to setting a tariff for fines, at least in terms of a starting point. For corporate manslaughter, the guidelines state that the appropriate fine will seldom be less than £500,000 and may be measured in £millions.
For health and safety offences causing death, the appropriate fine will seldom be less than £100,000 and may be measured in £100,000s or more.
Any fine will be expected to be paid within 28 days of sentence. There are extensive requirements to provide financial information to a sentencing court and failure to do so will result in the court assuming that the defendant can pay any fine it chooses to impose.
Seriousness of the offence
The factors affecting the seriousness of the offence broadly follow the consultation documentation. However, when considering how common the kind of breach was which lead to the death the court will have regard to how widespread the non compliance was; whether or not it was an isolated incident or a systematic departure from good practice.
Aggravating features
These largely follow the consultation documentation but a failure to respond to ‘near misses' arising in similar circumstances to that of the incident which lead to death is now to be considered an aggravating feature. It is important therefore that all organisations have an effective ‘near miss' reporting system and take remedial action where necessary.
Publicity orders
These can only be imposed when sentencing for corporate manslaughter. The guidelines recommend that a publicity order should ordinarily be imposed. The court will stipulate the place where any public announcement is to be made to ensure the conviction becomes known to shareholders and local people in the case of public bodies. This can include the form of any newspaper advertisement and the content of a statement be placed on the defendant's website.
The outcome will result in levels of fines for offences involving death being much larger than those seen in recent years and any organisation yet to consider the substantial risk posed by this legislation must act immediately.
© Shoosmiths. This page is for general information: it is not legal advice. Please read our full terms and conditions for details of the disclaimers and exclusions which apply.
Search the site
Enter the keywords below to search:
