||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 127 (Oct)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Hallett LJ, Grigson J and Judge Goddard QC
||John Cooper (instructed by DWF Solicitors) for the defendant.
||10 October 2007
Health and safety at work - Breach of statutory duty - Fine - Level of fine - Defendants with different means - Whether fine manifestly excessive - Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, s 2(1).
Health and safety at work Breach of statutory duty. A defendant's appeal against a fine of 35,000, which was imposed following its plea of guilty of contravening s2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 by failing to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of one of its employees at work, and prosecution costs of 35,000, would be allowed. In the instant case, the judge had placed too much emphasis on apportionment of overall liability between the defendant and co-defendants and had not paid sufficient attention to the individual culpability of the defendant. Having regard to the culpability and the financial position of the defendant and co-defendants, the penalty imposed upon the defendant was too high. Accordingly, the fine of 35,000 would be substituted by one of 10,000. The defendant would be given maximum credit for his plea which would reduce the sum to be paid in costs to 10,000.
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary