search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
– which placed it in the medium turnover bracket for a fine – the court decided it should have regard to Chevron’s turnover, which placed the case in the very large organisation bracket, bringing a consequent sharp increase in the potential fine. Reports suggest that it did so because


Chevron was responsible for the refinery when the explosion occurred, and significantly had agreed to provide Valero UK with an indemnity in respect of the incident and any fine imposed. Arguably, this is a case of exceptional circumstances.


Flexible application


Whilst the Court of Appeal decision is a welcome judgment for entities (with large parents) sentenced under the Guideline – as a strong reassertion of the principle that the corporate veil should not be pierced when sentencing a corporate offender – the court was at pains to stress that the Guideline was intended to be flexible ‘in order to meet the


broad range of circumstances which may fall to be considered in relation to’ such offences. That flexibility is seen in the Chevron case, where the indemnity was seen to be a key factor in assessing the financial realities of the situation. Significantly, both parties in that case


also agreed with the court’s approach to sentencing – in the same way that criminal fines can’t be insured against, the question remains whether an indemnity would hold up to scrutiny if the indemnifier refused to pay


Laura White is an associate in the health and safety team at Pinsent Masons. For more information, view page 5


This is Laura White’s final ‘Weighing up the law’ column for F&RM Journal – so we would like to take this opportunity to thank both her and Pinsent Masons for their time, expertise and regular contributions to our journal over the last three years.


www.frmjournal.com DECEMBER 2019/JANUARY 2020


23


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