Could it be You?
Corporate Manslaughter
Helen Devery
BLM Manchester
Manslaughter cases
 226 deaths in 2002/03
 235 deaths in 2003/04
 Since 1992
– 253 referred to CPD
– 69 prosecutions
– 18 convictions
Disasters
 Herald of Free Enterprise, 1987
 Kings Cross fire, 1987
 Piper Alpha, 1988
 Southall rail crash, 1997
 Paddington rail crash, 1999
 Potters Bar, 2002
 Morecambe Bay, 2004
No-one accountable for loss of life in
major disasters
Hatfield 2000
 Balfour Beatty
 Network Rail
 Managers charged
Current legislation
Corporate manslaughter
A company can only be convicted if a company
officer can be
 Shown to be guilty of manslaughter himself
and
 Identified as the ‘controlling mind’ of the
company
Problem is one of…
 Identification
Of a director who is blameworthy
– The so-called ‘guilty controlling mind’
 Direct casual link
Between director’s area of responsibility
and resultant death
Identification problem
‘Where a corporation, through the controlling mind of
one of its agents, does an act which fulfils the
prerequisites of the crime of manslaughter, it is
properly indictable for the crime of manslaughter’.
R v P&O European Ferries (Dover) Ltd
‘Unless an identified individual’s conduct,
characterisable as gross criminal negligence, can
be attributed to the company, the company is not, in
the present state of the common law, liable for
manslaughter’.
Att. Gen. Ref No 2 of 1999
Corporate killers
 Pete Kite, 1994
 Stephen and Julie Bowles, 1999
 Brian Dean, 2002
 John Horner, 2003
Convicted because they were small
companies with an easily identifiable
controlling individual
Peter Kite
(Managing Director, OLL Ltd) 1994
 Ignored previous advice
 British Canoe Union Guidelines were
not followed
 Inadequate supervision
John Horner
(Telgaard Hardwood) 2003
 No safety policy
 No risk assessments
 No safe stacking procedure
Combating the problem?
‘A poisoned chalice’
 Post of Health & Safety Director
 Board members and the Health &
Safety Policy
Reform
‘There is great public concern at the criminal law’s
lack of success in convicting companies of
manslaughter where a death has occurred due to
gross negligence by the organisation as a whole’.
‘The law need to be clear and effective in order to
secure public confidence and must bite properly on
large corporations whose failure to set or maintain
standards causes death. It is not targeted at
conscientious companies that take their health &
safety responsibilities seriously’.
David Blunkett, 21 May 2003
Proposals
 1996 ‘Criminal Law, Involuntary
Manslaughter’
– The Law Commission
 2002 ‘Reforming the Law on Involuntary
Manslaughter’
 2002 ‘Involuntary Manslaughter: Regulatory
Impact Assessment’
– The Home Office
Proposed legislation
Corporate killing
 A company will be convicted if it can be
shown that:
– A management failure caused the death; and
– That failure constitutes conduct which fell
‘far’ below what could be reasonably
expected
 Problem of identification overcome?
To find management failure
 What standard of safety could reasonably
have been expected of this company offering
services in this field
 Did the standard attained fall far below the
reasonable standard?
 Did the failure to attain that reasonable
standard cause the death of one or more
individuals?
Individuals in the Dock?
 Focus on corporate failings
 But still possible to prosecute
individuals for manslaughter where
gross negligence causes death
 And Directors still face prosecution
The way forward
 Increased scrutiny of management systems
 Improvement of systems and assessments
 Pragmatic approach
 Learning from mistakes
 Keeping up to date with issues
Managing the investigation
Process
 Seek early advice
 Check the D&O Policy
 Preservation of evidence
 Understand privilege
 Separate representation?
 Maintain communication
Any Questions ?
Helen Devery
BLM Manchester