Corporate Manslaughter And Corporate Homicide Act 2007

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (the Act) will largely come into force on 6 April 2008. This follows apparent increasing concern amongst the public that companies and organisations are not being held sufficiently accountable for deaths caused by "criminal" negligence.

The Old Law

Previously, it was only possible to bring a successful corporate manslaughter case if it could be shown that one person, who was a "controlling mind" of the company, had committed reckless or grossly negligent acts or omissions which led to the accident. The larger the company, the more difficult the test was to apply. Under the old regime there were very few successful prosecutions. Indeed, none of the series of recent rail and ferry disasters has resulted in a successful prosecution for manslaughter being brought against any of the relevant rail and ferry companies.

The New Offence

Organisations such as corporations and trade unions will be guilty of the new offence if:

the way their senior management organises or manages their activities causes a person's death; and

this amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed to the deceased.

The offence is, therefore, concerned with the most serious incidents of management failure that result in death, which overcomes the historical obstacle of finding a "controlling mind" of the organisation directly responsible, via an unbroken chain of responsibility.

Gross Breach of Duty of Care

For the purposes of the Act, a "relevant duty of care" is essentially the same as the duty of care owed by an organisation under the law of negligence. The Act specifies the particular duties, which include a duty owed to employees or other workers, a duty owed to occupiers of premises, and duties owed in connection with activities such as the supply of goods and services, the carrying on of construction or maintenance operations or indeed any other commercial activity.

The test to determine whether there has been a "gross breach" of any relevant duty of care is whether the conduct in question falls far below what can reasonably be expected of that organisation in the circumstances. In determining this issue, the Act requires a jury to consider whether the evidence shows that the organisation failed to comply with any health and safety legislation and guidance relating to the alleged breach and, if so, how serious that failure was. This will involve looking at senior management's conduct (collectively...