COMPANIES: CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER
Study Unit
COMPANIES: CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER ~24 min
(A) ABOUT CORPORATE MANSLAUGHTER Under UK law, a corporation can be found guilty of the crime of corporate manslaughter (or corporate homicide in Scotland) if a gross breach of the duty of care of a company results in death. Following a police investigation, the crime of corporate manslaughter will be prosecuted on behalf of the state by an organisation known as the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which makes its decisions independently of either the police or government. The organisation states on its website that “our duty is to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence, and to bring offenders to justice wherever possible.” The information below is an extract from the Code for Crown Prosecutors, a public document which contains the principles Crown Prosecutors should have in mind when they make decisions on cases.
(B) INTRODUCTION Corporate Manslaughter is an offence created by Section 1 of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (‘the Act’). It came into force on 6 April 2008. The offence was created to ensure that companies and other organisations can be held properly accountable for very serious failings resulting in death. The offence of gross negligence manslaughter is abolished insofar as it relates to companies and other organisations. Corporate Manslaughter is wider in scope than the previous common law offence. It continues to apply only to the most serious corporate failings. There is a high threshold for liability, requiring proof of a gross breach of the relevant duty of care. However, it is no longer necessary to show that a person who was the ‘controlling mind’ of the organisation was personally responsible for the offence.
Under the 2007 Act, the offence of corporate manslaughter relates to the way in which the relevant activity was managed or organised throughout the company or organisation. Wider considerations such as the overall management of health and safety, the selection and training of staff, the implementation of systems of working and the supervision of staff can be taken into account. An organisation is not liable if the failings were exclusively at a junior level. The failings of senior management must have formed a substantial element in the breach. However, the failings at senior management level do not of themselves have to amount to a gross breach of duty. Liability for the offence is assessed by looking at the failings of the organisation as a whole.
The prosecution must prove that the breach of duty was causative of death. The test is whether the breach made a more than minimal contribution to the death. Because the defendant is a corporate body, the penalty must be a fine. The court also has power to make ancillary orders including Remedial Orders and Publicity Orders. A definitive sentencing guideline has been published by the Sentencing Council with effect from 1 February 2016. The level of sentence will depend on the size of the organisation. The sentence range is specified as £180,000 to £20 million.
(C) ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENCE The following needs to be proved: the defendant is a qualifying organisation; the organisation owed a relevant duty of care to the deceased; there was a gross breach of that duty by the organisation; the way in which its activities were managed or organised by its senior management was a substantial element in the breach; and the gross breach of the organisation’s duty caused or contributed to the death.
(D) FOREIGN COMPANIES The offence of corporate manslaughter applies to all companies and other corporate bodies operating in the UK, whether they are incorporated in the UK or abroad. Section 28 makes express provision as to territorial jurisdiction, the determinative factor being whether the harm from which death resulted occurred within the United Kingdom.
Read A and B opposite and circle the mistake in the following sentences. Each word is incorrect because it results in an inaccurate collocation.
1. Since the new Act came into force only a few companies have been held guilty of the crime of corporate manslaughter. 2. Any breach of the duty of care must be a major breach in order to amount to corporate manslaughter. 3. One of the stated principles of the CPS is to take offenders to justice whenever possible. 4. The new Act was intended to make sure that negligent companies can be found accountable for their actions. 5. The offence of corporate manslaughter is larger in scope than the previous common law offence of gross negligence manslaughter. 6. There have been relatively few prosecutions under the new Act because the threshold for liability is so tall. 7. The new act looks at the way activity within a company is managed, including the execution of systems of working. 8. Under the new act a company can be liable for corporate manslaughter if the control of staff is not carried out carefully enough. 9. In order to be guilty of corporate manslaughter the acts or omissions of senior managers must have formed a big element of the breach which led to someone’s death. 10. Liability for corporate manslaughter is assessed by the CPS by looking at the faults of the whole organisation and not just the management.
Match each word on the left below with the correct definition on the right.
1. An Ancillary Order is ….. (a) the public body that issues guidelines on criminal sentences.
2. A Remedial Order is ….. (b) an order to make information about a criminal offence generally known.
3. A Publicity Order is ….. (c) bodies such as companies, partnerships or trade unions, as listed in the Act.
4. The Sentencing Council is ….. (d) any order imposed by the court in addition to the sentence.
5. A ‘qualifying organisation’ includes ….. (e) an order requiring a company to remedy a management failure that led to a death.
DISCUSSION POINTS • Before the new Act, the CPS had to prove that there was ‘a controlling mind’ within an organisation who was personally responsible for the gross breach that resulted in death. Do you think that the new Act is an improvement? • The elements that the CPS need to prove to the court under the new Act are listed in C opposite. Do you think they will result in justice being done in the majority of cases? • The relevance of this law to international businesses is set out in D opposite. What would happen to a foreign company whose negligence caused a death in your country?
Speaking & Writing for this topic
Two short tasks scored against TOEFL rubrics. The prompt is generated for this topic — use the vocabulary you have just studied.