header-logo header-logo

31 May 2023
Issue: 8027 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Employment , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Serco failed to protect court officers

Security firm Serco has been fined £2.25m and ordered to pay £433,596 in costs at the Old Bailey for health and safety failings following the death of custody officer Lorraine Barwell.

The deceased, who had worked for Serco for ten years, died from brain injuries after being kicked in the head at Blackfriars Crown Court in 2015 during the restraint of a prisoner in custody.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Serco had failed to properly analyse risk intelligence on prisoners and communicate risks and safety precautions to staff. There was a failure to have sufficient procedures in place and follow them, to provide readily accessible protective equipment, and to ensure further training was provided where identified as required.

The HSE also highlighted a continued failure to adequately staff court activities, manage working hours, assess risks of violence and aggression, communicate critical safety information, have suitable procedures in place, and to work in accordance with those procedures covering a period of over three years. Time pressures, staffing levels and business priorities had led to routine violations of procedures by staff in order to get the job done, which had gone unchallenged. This is despite such failings being brought to their attentions by HM Prisons Inspectorate, the Ministry of Justice, HSE Inspectors and Serco’s own staff.

A separate incident occurred at Woolwich Court annex in 2016, during which a member of staff was rammed against a wall and strangled. Help was delayed as there were no staff manning the annex to respond to the alarm button—there should have been 32 Serco officers at court that day, but there were only 22. 

HSE inspector Helen Donnelly said: ‘Serco drastically failed in their duties to protect both Lorraine Barwell and other staff over a sustained period. Had Serco carried out their legal duties, these incidents could have been prevented.’

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