Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 274 (Mar)
Court: Divisional Court
Judge:

Lord Woolf CJ and Wright J

Representation Sarah Lee (instructed by CMS Cameron McKenna) for the claimant.
  Paul Lasok QC and Jason Coppel (instructed by Bond Pearce) for the HSE.
Judgment Dates: 19 March 2002

Catchwords

Health and safety at work - Employer's duties - Duties to other person's employees - Duty in respect of design and construction of machine - Claimant's machine accidentally killing employee of purchaser of machine - Claimant being prosecuted under domestic legislation in respect of design of machine and failure to remedy identified fault - Claimant contending prosecution unlawful as legislation giving rise to same offence as regulations implementing Community obligations - Whether prosecution abuse of process - ss 3, 6 - Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 - Council Directive (EEC) 98/37.

The Case

Prosecutions for an indictable offence under s6 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, if based on facts also giving rise to a summary offence under the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992, would be unlawful. That would not be the case, however, for prosecutions under s3 of the 1974 Act, which had no corresponding offence under the regulations.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.