header-logo header-logo

13 December 2007
Issue: 7300 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

Corporate manslaughter fines could force firms out

News

Plans to fine first-time offenders up to 10% of their annual turnover for corporate manslaughter offences could force companies to leave the UK and move their headquarters elsewhere, if enacted, lawyers say.
The Sentencing Advisory Panel has drawn up proposals—currently out for consultation—which would see fines of 2.5%–10% of average annual turnover imposed for an offence of corporate manslaughter. When sentencing for an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 involving death, meanwhile, the fine range would be 1%–7.5% of average annual turnover.

Gerard Forlin, barrister at 2-3 Gray’s Inn Square, says: “This is of fundamental importance to organisations operating in the UK and some may reflect on continuing to have their major headquarters here.”
He says the proposed fines—which would be in line for those imposed for competition offences—cannot rely on a deterrent effect since “some people working in very dangerous environments feel they cannot do much more”.
Forlin believes this could be the final straw which, on top of high taxes, terrorist threats, high workforce costs and more, forces companies to move their UK bases.

However, Jeff Zindani, managing director of Forum Law, argues that the fine range is unlikely to have much of a deterrent effect on companies but “demonstrates yet again the weakness of this legislation”.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll