Corporate Manslaughter Revisited

legal updates

Latest fine of £480,000 plus £84,000 costs.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act of 2007 came in with a blaze of glory heralding a new start and greater accountability for individuals who through gross negligence cause the death of a third party or by unlawful conduct or act, involving danger or harm, causes the death of a third party.

The Act which came into force in April 2008 has taken a long time to bite but has finally grabbed our attention with the latest fine of £480,000 plus £84,000 costs.

The first case resulted from the death of a 27 year old geologist who was trapped and eventually buried in a 3.5 metre trench.  The Company Cotswold Geotechnical holdings had failed to take all reasonably practical steps to protect him.  The Company pleaded guilty in February 2011 and were fined £385,000.  The second case brought was against a Northern Ireland pig farming company JMW Farms whose employee died after suffering crush injuries having fallen into the Company’s meal mixing plant.  They were fined £187,000 and costs of £13,000.

The latest case relates to the death of Steven Berry who fell 45 feet to his death through a roof panel on 28th May 2008.  Lion Steel Ltd were sentenced on 20th July 2012 with a fine of £480,000 to be paid in four instalments ending in September 2015.   Judge Gilbart QC in judgment said that. He would regard it as a most regrettable consequence if the fine were to imperil the employment of former colleagues of the deceased”.
The current sentencing guidelines under the Act refers to a fine of less than £500,000 seldom being appropriate after a trial and it may be measured in millions.   In the above case the Company accepted liability and the Judge accepted its previous good safety record.

Under the Act an organisation is guilty of corporate manslaughter if the way it manages its affairs and activities caused a death and amounts to a gross breach of the duty of care owned to that person.  In considering the offence a substantial part of the breach must be due to the way activities have been organised by Senior Management.  Personal charges may be brought against the Director and/or other senior management.

So how does this affect you?

If you have a service and repair outlet it will be your responsibility to ensure that all technicians carrying out road tests, have a full current driving licence, are competent to drive the vehicle they have entrusted to them, ie don’t let an inexperienced young technician drive a powerful ‘top of the range’ vehicle.

If you have salesmen involved in test drives the same applies but additionally you must ensure that they understand how to ensure their safety when allowing a member of the public to take the wheel.
If you have a sales force on the road, in addition to the above you must ensure that their targets and work load can be achieved without excessive speed and/or without subjecting them to unacceptable stress levels.  If they were to be involved in a fatal accident and it was proved that the management had exerted excessive pressure which was a contributory factor in the accident then the management may be charged with Corporate Manslaughter.

For further advice and guidance on this issue contact Lawgistics on 01480 455500.

Brave AgencyDriving growth in the automotive industry

Brave is an award-winning digital agency offering a comprehensive range of services aimed at helping your business grow. From rebrands and web development to marketing campaigns that get you noticed, we do it all. Since 2000, we’ve helped businesses across the automotive sector reach new heights. Could yours be next?

Dennis ChapmanIn remembrance of Dennis Chapman 1951 -2015Read More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Navigating legal remedies for unpaid debts in vehicle repairs

Learn how to safeguard your rights and assets in vehicle repairs with expert insights on managing torts and liens effectively.

Disclaimers – are these really worth the paper they are written on?

Of course, if someone ignores all valid warnings and suffers injury, then they may only have themselves to blame.

The court finds car dealer partly liable for damage caused by the removal of a sticker!

Due to COVID-19, the court held an Early Neutral Evaluation, a 30-minute telephone assessment of each party’s position.

Defamation – How suing for libel and slander is easier said than done!

All well and good for the rich and famous or organisations with cavernously deep pockets but for mere mortals, that is rarely the answer.

Awarded £25,000 in general damages and Trustpilot ordered to remove review

Perhaps the wide reporting of this case will give malicious reviewers pause for thought.

Misrepresentation? Not without an untrue statement

On the evidence, there was no question that our member had complied with his obligations under the Consumer Rights Act, fully.

Afterparty? One after party with work colleagues leads to a pay out…

An argument broke out regarding a new employee’s placement and terms.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

01480 455500

Vinpenta House
High Causeway

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.