CAV Aerospace may well have been a special case, but Grenfell provides a real opportunity for the legislation to be tested. The move came after a controversial decision not to prosecute anyone for manslaughter following the Paddington rail disaster in which 31 people died in October 1999. The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act, which was enforced in April 2008, is the main legislation which has been put into place regarding corporate manslaughter. The 'Hidden Report' into the causes of the collision south of Clapham Junction on December 12 1988, in which 35 people died. However, the courts stated as the company had been validly formed, Mr Salamon could claim the money back. For any company of any size, protecting the health and safety of employees or members of the public who may be affected by its activities is an essential part of risk management and must be led by the company board. The Law Commission report Legislating The Criminal Code, Involuntary Manslaughter highlights several high profile disasters including; the Kings Cross Underground Station fire, The Piper Alpha Oil Platform disaster, the Clapham rail crash and the Herald of Free Enterprise tragedy as examples of situations in which inquiries had found corporate bodies at fault but no successful prosecution for manslaughter had been brought. He picked up the receiver and spoke to the signalman, informing him of the collision and asking him to call the emergency services. A total of 35 people died in the collision, while 484 were injured.[1]. Recent Posts On the morning of 12 December 1988, a crowded passenger train crashed into the rear of another train that had stopped at a signal, just south of Clapham Junction railway station in London, and subsequently sideswiped an empty train travelling in the opposite direction. In overturning the conviction, Lord Reid referred to Lord Dennings judgement in Bolton (Engineering) Co v Graham in defining the state of mind of a company: A company may in many ways be likened to a human body. However, after an eight-month Old Bailey trial in 2005, Balfour Beatty was fined 10m for breaching health and safety regulations (later reduced to 7.5m). These include a provision that there could be a substantial reduction for public bodies if they can prove that the fine would have a significant impact on their provision of services and the provision that in ordinary circumstances, it is anticipated that compensation should be dealt with in the civil courts. Here are five examples of corporate cases brought to trial before The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 was given Royal Assent. read full story The Identification theory also known as the Identification principal presented a bar to prosecutions due to the difficulty in finding the directing mind and will of a company. Prison Custody: The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 DAVID M. DOYLE and SUZANNE SCOTT David M. Doyle is Lecturer in Law, and Suzanne Scott is PhD candidate, . . Although the eschewing of Crown immunity was widely welcomed, both complete exemptions and partial exemptions exist to cover decisions relating to the allocation of public resources or the weighing of competing public interests, terrorism operations and exclusively public functions alongside exemptions related to emergency responses and the training for those responses. The legislation opens the door to arguments about what construes a significant role in a substantial part of an organisations activities. As the board was responsible under the "vicarious liability" principle, it paid compensation reaching 1m in some cases, though no-one was prosecuted for manslaughter. The operator in the nearby Raynes Park electrical control room suspected there had been a derailment and re-configured the supply so that the nearby Wimbledon line trains could still run. The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Cecil Parkinson) With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the results of the inquiry into the Clapham junction rail disaster of December 1988. The elements of the CMCHA 2007 are as follows: The new act brought a significant step forward by removing Crown immunity for certain government departments and allowing prosecutions to be brought against a wide range of bodies. Excessive working hours, cancellation of route-proving trains and lack of detailed planning were identified as contributory factors to the incident. I am publishing today, as a Command . This essay will investigate into the previous common law identification principle and the introduction of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. [32] A year later, a report into a collision at London Waterloo highlighted similar circumstances, saying that "some of the lessons from the 1988 Clapham Junction accident are fading from the railway industry's collective memory". It remains to be seen what hurdle this element of the offence would have in a prosecution against a complex large organisation like the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea. Gobert writes: Further, through its requirement that persons who play a significant role in the formulation and/or implementation of organisation policy be shown to have made a substantial contribution to the corporate offence, the Act threatens to perpetuate the same evidentiary stumbling blocks that frustrated prosecutions under the identification doctrine., In commenting on the draft bill in 2005, Clarkson noted that the requirement of identifying senior managers threatens to open the door to endless argument in court as to whether certain persons do or do not constitute senior managers.. This analysis written in 2018 is an example of my distinction level research in my law degree. The decision provides clarification about when foreseeability of risk occurs in cases involving gross negligence manslaughter. This principle made it difficult for the courts to make a conviction due to the fact that it stated only an individual can be responsible for such a serious offence. Gobert J, The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 Thirteen years in the making but was it worth the wait? The Modern Law Review (2008). It said in order to convict a company, individual defendants who could be identified with the firm would themselves have to be guilty of manslaughter. [31], In 2017, a Rail Accident Investigation Branch report into a serious irregularity at Cardiff Central on 29 December 2016 revealed that some of the lessons from the Clapham Junction accident appeared to have been forgotten. A station manager faces manslaughter charges following a deadly high-speed train collision that killed dozens of people in central Greece, his attorney said Thursday. British Rail was fined 250,000 for violations of health and safety law in connection with the accident. Disaster at Bristol: Explanations and implications of a tragedy. The disaster at Grenfell Tower has been described by David Lammy, Labour MP for Tottenham, as a case of " corporate manslaughter ". [30], The Basingstoke train stopped at the next signal after the faulty signal, in accordance with the rule book. A further criticism of the act would be one made concerning the feelings of the family and friends of the deceased. [26] Although British Rail was fined 250,000 (equivalent to 571,000 in 2021[27]) for breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc. 13. The second issue with the duty of care requirement is the intermingling of civil and criminal laws which Lord Justice Kay in the case of R v Wacker suggests have two different aims. Reference will need to be made to the statutory provisions of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, recently decided cases and academic opinion, amongst other sources. A public inquiry was launched the following day chaired by retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick. On this Wikipedia the language links are at the top of the page across from the article title. Shortly after 08:10,[2][3] the following train, the 06:30 from Bournemouth, made up of 4REP unit 2003 and 4TC units 8027 and 8015, collided with the Basingstoke train. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Edit Like Comment . clapham rail disaster corporate manslaughter. Following Cotswold Geotechnical's landmark 385,000 fine on Thursday for corporate manslaughter we take a look back at five key cases. Indictments could follow against designers, contractors and the local authority, charges of gross negligence manslaughter being brought against individuals, and corporate manslaughter in respect to companies or bodies. 21, Issue. 42 42. . Roper concludes that we will have to wait to see if the concerns about the duty of care requirement were in fact well founded.. deaths in November 1987; the Piper Alpha oil rig fire, 167 deaths in July 1988; the Clapham train crash, 35 deaths in December 1988; the Purley train crash, 5 deaths March 1989 and the sinking of the Marchioness, 51 deaths in August 1989. This could be seen as the incorrect decision as P&O Ferries Ltd clearly had a duty of care towards their customers and employees. [11], An independent inquiry was chaired by Anthony Hidden, QC for the Department for Transport. On 12 December 1988, a passenger train crashed into the rear of another train that had stopped at a signal and another empty train then crashed into the debris. Sample Page; ; There have been other acquittals for Corporate Manslaughter including in R v PS and JE Ward which demonstrates the difference in the standards expected by Health and Safety legislation and the burden of proof, beyond all reasonable doubt, for corporate manslaughter. The Clapham Junction railway crash occurred on the morning of 12 December 1988, when a crowded British Rail passenger train crashed into the rear of another train that had stopped at a signal just south of Clapham Junction railway station in London, England, and subsequently sideswiped an empty train travelling in the opposite direction. This can be seen in the case of R v Wacker in the Court of Appeal where the defendant appealed his conviction for Gross Negligent Manslaughter where negligence is defined by grossly falling below the duty of care as defined in Tort. The fire spread and claimed the lives of 71 people. *You can also browse our support articles here >. mariana enriquez biography clapham rail disaster corporate manslaughter. United . In 1996 the collision was one of the events cited by the Law Commission as reason for new law on manslaughter, resulting in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. An inquest jury returned verdicts of unlawful killing in 187 cases. [14] The re-signalling project had been planned assuming more people were available, but employees felt that the programme was inflexible and that they were under pressure to get the work done. Peter Kite, owner of OLL Limited, was jailed for three years, and his company fined 60,000 following the 1993 Lyme Bay canoeing tragedy in which four teenagers died. The crash site, near the Vale of Tempe, in northern Greece, on Friday. He breached this duty and as a result 51 people were killed. 11 The new Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 c. 19 which also applies to police forces and gov-ernmental departments [Art. Whilst the act was in consultation stage, it was argued that local authorities were potentially solely public functions which the act exempts from prosecution. One case exists of the prosecution of a larger company: CAV Aerospace. The breach could be seen as gross negligence manslaughter as the company should have been making sure the working conditions were safe for their employees to work in. These include the Kings Cross Underground Fire, The Clapham Rail Crash, and The Herald of Free Enterprise tragedy. Although the maximum fine is 20m, there are several conditions in step four of the Sentencing Councils guidelines that may affect any proposed fine. Network Rail, which took over from Railtrack in 2002, was fined 3.5m. Before the implementation of the CMCHA 2007, companies could be prosecuted for manslaughter, however prosecutions relied on identifying the directing mind and will of the company (a senior individual who could be said to embody the company in his actions and decisions) who was also guilty of the offence. The crash, just south of Clapham Junction station, killed 35 people and left. Tombs notes that not only is the latter [corporate manslaughter] a more exacting test, but it is one in which the burden of proof falls on the prosecution, not the defendant. Therefore, P&O Ferries Ltd should have been convicted of corporate manslaughter. The signalman immediately switched all the signals he could to 'danger', and signalled to the adjacent signal boxes he had an obstruction on the line. This led directly to the death of an employee. Also, the act is still linked to the identification doctrine in some respect due to the fact that the company can only be found guilty if the senior management has played a significant part in the management failure which consequently caused the death. Separate charges were brought under Sections 3 and 33 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and the company was fined a record 15m. The period from December 1988 to August 1989 saw the Clapham rail crash, the Lockerbie air disaster, the Kegworth air crash, the Hillsborough stadium disaster and the Thames riverboat. Safety at Work etc. He then called the Clapham Junction station manager and asked him to call the emergency services. The status of having a separate legal personality also means the newly established corporation will have various characteristics of a natural person. A judge yesterday dismissed manslaughter charges against five rail executives and the engineering group Balfour Beatty over the Hatfield rail disaster, in which four people died in October. Tombs writes that the weight of evidence demonstrating senior management knowledge of these conditions was so blatant arguing that this case may not be a watershed, rather possibly a special case and Roper notes that in a situation where the evidence was not so blatant (as Tombs describes it) it would likely be much harder for the prosecution to establish to the criminal standard of proof that the senior management played a substantial element in the gross breach.. Identifying principal aims of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. . The sinking of the Marchioness, in August 1989, is another high profile case which also led to the questioning of the previous common law. They should have made sure adequate and safe signalling was in place to prevent any danger to the passengers onboard their trains. The bodies from Tuesday's train crash in Greece are being returned to families in closed caskets. Until then, English law abided by the principle laid out by a 17th century judge, who deemed, "Companies have a soul to damn, but no body to kick". The appellant had been convicted of the manslaughter of 58 illegal entrants to the UK as he had breached his duty of care to them by closing an air hatch on the back of his refrigerated lorry en-route to the UK causing the suffocation and death of those individuals. The British Rail Board admitted liability for the accident, which was attributed to careless work by signal engineers. At 8.13am on 12 December 1988, three trains collided in south London in one of the UK's worst rail disasters. Other exclusions were explored by the Joint Committee as part of the draft bill under the title Crown immunity by the back door? In relation to the exclusion of exclusively public functions, Professor Oliver opined that this exclusion might in fact cover everything that statutory authorities did arguing local authorities owe all their powers to enactments and it would seem to follow that local authorities and other statutory bodies are immune under the bill as it places all activities exercised under statutory authority in the category of exclusive public function. Grenfell will be the first test of this exclusion. Southall Rail Disaster (1997) 68 2.3.7. Corporate manslaughter is when a persons death is caused by an act of corporate negligence. Clapham Junction rail crash. A company can be made into a corporation by Royal Charter, by an Act of Parliament or by the procedure established under the Companies Acts 1985, 1989 and 2006. At least 57 people died when two trains collided near the city of Larissa early Wednesday. International Company and Commercial Law Review (2013), Andrew Hopkin, Corporate Manslaughter Prosecution Judgment Synopsis, < https://www.brownejacobson.com/health/training-and-resources/legal-updates/2016/01/corporate-manslaughter-prosecution-judgment-synopsis> accessed 20th March 2018, Nick McMahon and Mamata Dutta, Corporate Manslaughter a tale of two acquittals and a conviction < https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=579241d8-655c-4fe9-b731-0c069bfe141e> Accessed 24th March 2018, Ormerod D and Laird K, Smith and Hogans Criminal Law 14th Edition (2015), https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/corporate-manslaughter, https://web.archive.org/web/20071025031113/http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/manslaughterhomicideact07.pdf, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-cause-fridge-faulty-fourth-floor-london-kensington-disaster-latest-a7792566.html, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/16/grenfell-tower-final-death-toll-police-say-71-people-died-in-fire, https://inews.co.uk/news/grenfell-tower-public-inquiry-opening-hearing/, https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I1fdf7cdc590011e598dc8b09b4f043e0/View/FullText.html?comp=pluk&transitionType=SearchItem&contextData=(sc.Search)&OWSessionId=NA&skipAnonymous=true&firstPage=true, http://www.corporateaccountability.org.uk/manslaughter/cases/convcases/2.htm, https://www.brownejacobson.com/health/training-and-resources/legal-updates/2016/01/corporate-manslaughter-prosecution-judgment-synopsis, https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=579241d8-655c-4fe9-b731-0c069bfe141e, a substantial element of that breach was in the way those activities were managed or organised, the defendant must not fall within one of the. [6] The accident had tripped the high-voltage feed to the traction current. The case which emphasises the idea and importance of a company being a separate legal personality from the people who created it is Salamon v Salamon & Co Ltd 1897. Management was to ensure that no one was working high levels of overtime,[20] and a senior project manager made responsible for all aspects of the project. There is some debate to how well this case tests the senior management test, given that on the facts there was a somewhat smoking gun as the company had received clear, unequivocal and repeated warnings of a stockpiling hazard but had not acted. Tesco appealed to the divisional courts where the conviction was upheld before appealing to the House of Lords. The Court of Appeal later reduced Mr Kite's sentence from three years to two, meaning he only spent 14 months in jail. Travel and Life. The ongoing investigations publicized the fact that the events that had caused the disasters would have been preventable if the management practice had been of good quality. The Clapham Junction rail crash, which involved a collision of three trains in December 1988, is one case which resulted in no one being found guilty of corporate manslaughter. 2002 - Potter's Bar. If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on LawTeacher.net then please: Our academic writing and marking services can help you!