Health & Safety Enforcement
๐ Key Legislation:
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA 1974)
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992
๐น 1. R v. British Steel plc (1995)
Facts:
British Steel was prosecuted after an employee suffered severe injury due to faulty equipment.
Legal Issue:
Did the company breach its duty to ensure the safety of employees?
Judgment:
Company was fined heavily; court emphasized employerโs duty to maintain safe equipment and environment.
Principle:
โก Employers have strict liability to provide safe workplace and equipment.
๐น 2. R v. Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd (2018)
Facts:
Following a fatal accident involving a train driver, Network Rail faced prosecution for failing to manage risk properly.
Legal Issue:
Whether risk assessments and safety management were adequate.
Judgment:
Conviction upheld; failure to conduct proper risk assessments breached HSWA 1974.
Principle:
โก Duty to manage risks proactively and document assessments.
๐น 3. R v. Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings Ltd (2011)
Facts:
The company was prosecuted after a worker was crushed during earthworks.
Legal Issue:
Breach of workplace safety procedures and supervision.
Judgment:
The court fined the company; lack of proper supervision was critical.
Principle:
โก Supervision and safe working systems are key duties.
๐น 4. R v. Tesco Stores Ltd (2014)
Facts:
Tesco was prosecuted after a customer slipped on a wet floor causing serious injury.
Legal Issue:
Does the company owe a duty of care to customers under health and safety laws?
Judgment:
Tesco was found liable; duty extends to visitors, not just employees.
Principle:
โก Health & Safety duties cover all persons on premises, including the public.
๐น 5. R v. John Cleary (2019)
Facts:
John Cleary, a site manager, was prosecuted individually for failing to ensure compliance with safety standards.
Legal Issue:
Can individuals be held criminally liable?
Judgment:
Cleary was convicted and fined personally.
Principle:
โก Individuals in control can be held responsible for breaches.
๐น 6. R v. Alcoa Fastening Systems UK Ltd (2009)
Facts:
Alcoa was prosecuted for failing to provide proper training leading to worker injury.
Legal Issue:
Whether training obligations under HSWA were fulfilled.
Judgment:
Fined; training is an essential employer responsibility.
Principle:
โก Employers must provide adequate health & safety training.
๐น 7. R v. McConnell Dowell Constructors Ltd (2017)
Facts:
A worker died due to failure to follow safety protocols on a construction site.
Legal Issue:
Were safety protocols sufficient and enforced?
Judgment:
Company convicted; failure to enforce safety rules is punishable.
Principle:
โก Enforcement of safety policies is a legal requirement.
โ๏ธ Summary Table of Cases
| Case | Key Issue | Legal Principle |
|---|---|---|
| British Steel (1995) | Equipment safety | Strict employer duty to maintain safety |
| Network Rail (2018) | Risk assessment | Must proactively manage risks |
| Cotswold Geotechnical (2011) | Supervision | Proper supervision mandatory |
| Tesco Stores (2014) | Duty to customers | Covers all visitors on premises |
| John Cleary (2019) | Individual liability | Managers can be personally liable |
| Alcoa Fastening (2009) | Training | Adequate training required |
| McConnell Dowell (2017) | Safety enforcement | Policies must be enforced |
RELATED Blog
0 comments