NEWSFLASH
NEW SENTENCING GUIDELINES INTRODUCED FOR CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER, HEALTH AND SAFETY AND FOOD
SAFETY OFFENCES New sentencing guidelines have been published for sentencing organisations or individuals convicted of corporate manslaughter, health and safety and food safety and hygiene offences.
The new guidelines have been introduced in a bid to provide a consistent, fair and proportionate approach to sentencing, as many offences that come under the guidelines are very varied.
Cases could include a building firm that causes the death of an employee by not providing the proper equipment for working at height, a restaurant that causes an outbreak of e. coli poisoning through unsafe food preparation, or a manufacturer that causes injury to a new worker by not providing training for operating machinery.
The publication of the guidelines has ensured that there will be comprehensive sentencing guidelines covering the most commonly sentenced health and safety offences and food safety offences in England and Wales.
Previously there had been limited guidance for judges and magistrates
in dealing with complex, infrequent and serious offences.
The introduction of the guidelines means that in some cases, offenders will receive higher penalties, particularly large organisations committing serious offences - such as when an organisation is convicted of deliberately breaking the law and creating a high risk of death or serious injury.
The guidelines are set to introduce higher fines across the board, in the majority of cases compared to those currently imposed.
Speaking about the new guidelines Jonathan Grimes, a partner specialising in corporate manslaughter and health and safety law at Kingsley Napley LLP, commented:
“The new guidelines send a clear message to company directors that they need to take their health and safety obligations seriously or risk facing significant penalties. From February 2016, fines will be calculated based on company turnover to have a real economic impact, according to the Sentencing Council.
“The amounts we are talking about represent a massive hike in the fine levels we have seen to date. Of course, the Sentencing Council wants the new regime to act as a further deterrent to companies in the habit of cutting corners or operating lax procedures. I hope this is the case. My fear is that in practice such harsh penalties may well encourage corporate defendants to contest allegations where previously they would have pleaded guilty. This would
be an unfortunate and doubtless unintended consequence.”
The increase in penalties for serious offending has been introduced because in the past, some offenders did not receive fines that properly reflected the crimes they committed.
The Council wants fines for these offences to be fair and proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and the means of offenders. In order to achieve this, the guidelines set out sentencing ranges that reflect the very different levels of risk of harm that can result from these offences.
Corporate manslaughter always involves at least one death, but health and safety offences can vary hugely; they may pose the risk of minor harm or lead to multiple fatalities.
The sentencing ranges also take into account how culpable the offender was. This could range from minor failings in procedures to deliberately dangerous acts.
While prison sentences are available for individuals convicted of very serious offences, most offences are committed by organisations and therefore fines are the only sentence that can be given.
Sentencing Council member Michael Caplan QC said:
“These guidelines will introduce a consistent approach to sentencing, ensuring fair and proportionate sentences for those who cause death or injury to their employees and the public or put them at risk. These offences can have very serious consequences and it is important that sentences reflect these.”
8
www.tomorrowshs.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64