header-logo header-logo

25 February 2011
Issue: 7454 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Death knell for companies?

High fines anticipated for corporate manslaughter after first conviction

A company convicted of corporate manslaughter has been fi neda 116 per cent of its annual turnover. Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd (CGH) was fi ned £385,000 last week at Winchester Crown Court, after becoming the first to be convicted of the new off ence under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.

A geologist working for CGH died in 2008 when a trench he was working in collapsed. Th e company was found to have breached health and safety legislation and ignored industry guidance. The company director, Peter Eaton, was previously charged with gross negligence manslaughter and a health and safety off ence, but was ruled too unwell to stand trial.

Gerard Forlin QC, of 2-3 Gray’s Inn Square, who specialises in health and safety law, says: “This company had a turnover in 2008 of £333,000 and was fined 116% of that. It was given a relatively long time to pay—ten years with £38,500 due each year. “I think companies are going to sit up and listen, as fines potentially have to be paid within 28 days according to the Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) guidance. In the context of its turnover, this is a high fine. If a fi ne of 116% were made against an oil company, large supermarket chain, bank or manufacturer then you can imagine the impact.

“However, each case willturn on its own facts and on the company’s ability to pay. I don’t think the court was sending out any particular message with this. It must be recalled that the SGC guidance set out the principles in any event.

“However, this case may well put the wind in the sails of the CPS and lead now to more prosecutions of larger organisations for corporate manslaughter.”

 Berrymans Lace Mawer LLP partner, Helen Devery says: “Although the fine is less than the starting point of £500,000 recommended by the SGC it will no doubt have a dramatic impact on a company of this size, refl ecting the trend towards harsher penalties.”

For more on this story see www.healthandsafetyatwork.com

Issue: 7454 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll