header-logo header-logo

06 June 2013 / Cathrine Grubb
Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Civil war?

What will the removal of civil liability for breaches of health & safety legislation mean, asks Cathrine Grubb

Section 47(2) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 as it stands, provides that breaches of health and safety legislation confer a civil right of action unless otherwise stated. Section 69 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 amends s 47 to reverse that presumption, so that civil liability will only apply where this is specifically provided for in the regulations.

This amendment was initially opposed by the House of Lords, when they voted against the changes on 6 March 2013. They subsequently backed down and approved amended proposals on 22 April 2013. The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 received royal assent on 25 April 2013. The amendment is not yet fully in force, but once it is it will apply to all cases where breach of a provision occurs after the date of commencement.

Removing civil liability will mean that claimants will be under a duty to prove a case in common law negligence for their claim to be successful. At common law

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll