8 TH OCTOBER 2015 LONDON #BarbourDirectors Agenda 16.30 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
8 th october 2015 london barbourdirectors agenda 16 30
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

8 TH OCTOBER 2015 LONDON #BarbourDirectors Agenda 16.30 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 10, 2023 263 likes •850 views

BARBOUR DIRECTORS CLUB 8 TH OCTOBER 2015 LONDON #BarbourDirectors Agenda 16.30 Registration 17.00 Heather Beach, OSH welcome presentation 17.15 Sentencing Guidelines Presentation Anne Davies, Special Counsel, Withers LLP

slide-1
SLIDE 1

BARBOUR DIRECTORS’ CLUB 8TH OCTOBER 2015 LONDON

#BarbourDirectors

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Agenda

16.30 – Registration 17.00 – Heather Beach, OSH welcome presentation 17.15 – Sentencing Guidelines Presentation – Anne Davies, Special Counsel, Withers LLP – Simon Joyston-Bechal, Director, Turnstone Law – Q & A 18.15 – Barbour presentation 18:30 – Drinks and networking

#BarbourDirectors

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Heather Beach

Director – OSH and Facilities Portfolios, UBM

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Sentencing Guidelines Presentation

Anne Davies, Special Counsel, Withers LLP Simon Joyston-Bechal, Director, Turnstone Law

#BarbourDirectors

slide-5
SLIDE 5

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Barbour Directors Club 8th October 2015 Sentencing for Health & Safety Criminal Offences

Anne Davies Withers LLP

slide-6
SLIDE 6

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Introduction

  • Who are the Sentencing Council?
  • Inconsistency in sentencing practices for health, safety and food
  • ffences.
  • Perception fines too low – average fine in year ending September

2014 £8,225 per offence.

  • Number of cases prosecuted by HSE 2013/14 - 517.
  • Estimated 55 fines in that period over £100k.
  • R v Sellafield C.A. 2014 – reviewed the principles of sentencing

corporate offenders.

  • Guidelines for sentencing environmental offences in place since July

2014.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Overview of proposed model for sentencing

  • rganisations

Step 1 –

Determining the offence category Step 2 – Starting point and category range Step 3 – Check if fine proposed proportionate to the means of the offender Step 4 – Other factors that may warrant adjustment Step 5-9 – Reduction for guilty plea; totality of fine; compensation; ancillary orders

slide-8
SLIDE 8

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Health & Safety offences, organisations. Step 1

Step 1 – Determining the offence category – Culpability

  • Very high
  • High
  • Medium
  • Low

–

  • Harm. 2 stages:-

(a) Risk of harm created by the offence (b) (i) exposed a significant number of people. (ii) significant cause of actual harm.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Seriousness of harm risked

Level A

  • Death
  • Physical or mental

impairment resulting in lifelong dependency on third party care for basic needs

  • Health condition

resulting in significantly reduced life expectancy Level B

  • Physical or mental impairment,

not amounting to Level A, which has a substantial and long-term effect on the sufferer’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities or

  • n their ability to return to work
  • A progressive, permanent or

irreversible condition Level C

  • All other cases

not falling within Level A

  • r Level B

High Harm category 1 Harm category 2 Harm category 3 Medium Harm category 2 Harm category 3 Harm category 4 Remote Harm category 3 Harm category 4 Harm category 4 (start towards bottom of range)

Likelihood of harm

Health & Safety offences, organisations. Step 1

slide-10
SLIDE 10

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Health & Safety offences, organisations. Step 2

Step 2

  • Starting point and category range

Micro – Not more than £2m turnover Small – between £2m and £10m turnover Medium – between £10m and £50m turnover Large – £50m and over Very large – not defined

  • Starting point and category range

eg Micro – Very high culpability range £150k - £450k Micro – Medium culpability range £60k - £160k Medium – Very high culpability range £1m - £4m Medium – Medium culpability range £300k - £1.3m

  • Aggravating and mitigating features
slide-11
SLIDE 11

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Health & Safety offences, organisations. Steps 3 & 4

  • Is fine proportionate
  • Other factors to adjust fine
  • not for profit nature of organisation
  • where turnover sits
slide-12
SLIDE 12

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Corporate Manslaughter

Step 1 Offence Category

  • How foreseeable was serious injury.
  • How far short of the appropriate standard did the
  • ffender fall.
  • How common is this kind of breach in this
  • rganisation.
  • Was there more than one death/and serious injury.
slide-13
SLIDE 13

London l Geneva l Zurich l Milan l Padua l New Haven l New York Greenwich l San Francisco l Los Angeles l Rancho Santa Fe l San Diego Singapore l Hong Kong l Tokyo l Sydney l British Virgin Islands

Corporate Manslaughter

Step 2 Starting point and Category

Large Turnover more than £50 million Offence category Starting point Category range A (more serious offences) £7,500,000 £4,800,000 - £20,000,000 B £5,000,000 £3,000,000 - £12,500,000 Medium Turnover £10 million to £50 million Offence category Starting point Category range A (more serious offences) £3,000,000 £1,800,000 - £7,500,000 B £2,000,000 £1,200,000 - £5,000,000 Small Turnover £2 million to £10 million Offence category Starting point Category range A (more serious offences) £800,000 £540,000 - £2,800,000 B £540,000 £350,000 - £2,000,000 Micro Turnover £2 million Offence category Starting point Category range A (more serious offences) £450,000 £270,000 - £800,000 B £300,000 £180,000 - £540,000

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Understanding the New Sentencing Guidelines for Health & Safety

8 October 2015

Barbour Directors’ Club

Dr Simon Joyston-Bechal

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Speaker

Dr Simon Joyston-Bechal Turnstone Law sjb@turnstonelaw.com Mobile: +44 (0) 7880 684 781

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Overview – New Sentencing Guidelines for Health & Safety – Part II

  • Surprising consequences
  • Impact of Court of Appeal – £100million fines
  • New imprisonment thresholds
  • Practical legal tips to reduce exposure to prosecution
slide-17
SLIDE 17

Surprising consequences

  • Understanding the impact of culpability factors
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Culpability Factors for Health & Safety Offences by Organisations

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Surprising consequences

  • Assessing ‘Likelihood of Harm’
  • The difference between basing fines on ‘harm risked’

and on actual harm

slide-20
SLIDE 20
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Surprising consequences

  • What about ‘very large organisations’?
slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Corporate manslaughter

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Court of Appeal – Fines in excess of £100m for very large companies

R v Thames Water (June 2015)

  • How to interpret guidelines for organisations with turnover that

“very greatly exceeds” £50m?

  • There must not be a “mechanistic extrapolation” of tariff fines
  • Court not bound by starting point and ranges for “Large
  • rganisations”
  • Fines for environmental and H&S breaches have often not been

adequate to bring home the appropriate message to directors and shareholders

  • “This may well result in a fine equal to a substantial percentage,

up to 100%, of the company’s pre-tax net profit … even if this results in fines in excess of £100m. Fines of such magnitude are imposed in the financial services market for breach of regulations.”

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Culpability Factors for Health & Safety Offences by Individuals

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Health & Safety Offences by Individuals

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Practical Legal Tips to Reduce Exposure to prosecution

Before an incident occurs:

  • Senior executive training to understand the importance of ‘setting

the right tone at the top’

  • Health & Safety legal review of H&S policy statement and roles

and responsibilities document

  • Accident response protocol
  • Avoid aggravating features

After an incident:

  • Challenge inappropriate enforcement notices
  • Obtain legal privilege over incident investigation report
  • Support for HSE interviews
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Senior executive training to understand the importance of ‘setting the right tone at the top’

  • Senior executive offence of neglect under s37 HSWA

(not as proactive as someone in their position ought to have been)

  • Corporate manslaughter offence requires senior

management failing, particularly if poor “attitudes, policies, systems or accepted practices”

  • Understanding relevance of IOD Guidance (Leading

H&S at Work) - http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg417.pdf

slide-29
SLIDE 29

IOD Guidance (Leading H&S at Work)

  • Strong and active leadership from the top
  • Board members should be seen on site, following all

H&S measures themselves and addressing any breaches immediately

  • Appraisals of senior managers should include H&S
  • Board must ensure adequate resources for H&S
  • Celebrate good H&S performance
slide-30
SLIDE 30

H&S Legal Review of Documents

  • Policy Statement – remove common hostages to

fortune

  • Roles and responsibilities document – remove

common hostages to fortune

  • Accident response protocol – procedure to obtain

legal privilege over incident investigation reports and to support employee interviews

slide-31
SLIDE 31
  • Failure to act upon previous warnings or advice from

authorities

  • Failure to heed relevant concerns of employees
  • Failure to respond appropriately to “near misses”
  • Cost-cutting at the expense of safety
  • Deliberate conduct
  • Injury to vulnerable persons

Understand and Avoid Aggravating Features:

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Challenge Inappropriate Enforcement Notices

  • Fee for Intervention Notice
  • Improvement Notice
  • Prohibition Notice

Strict 21 day appeal deadline

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Incident management – legal privilege

  • Special right to withhold documents/evidence
  • Consult lawyers to seek privilege over the

investigation/report

  • Dominant purpose is to obtain legal advice in

contemplation of legal proceedings

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Benefits if report is covered by privilege

  • Privileged documents do not have to be disclosed to

Police, HSE, Coroner or personal injury claimants

  • Can chose if requested by HSE to disclose factual

findings and keep conclusions privileged

  • Reduces inhibition on casting the net widely to identify

failings

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Support for HSE interviews

Interviews without caution

  • Compulsory (s 20)
  • Voluntary
  • Right to have a nominated representative present during the

interview

  • Training

Interviews under caution – PACE

  • Written representations instead?
slide-36
SLIDE 36

Summary of Key Points

Appreciate new levels of H&S fines that will be retrospective Before an incident occurs:

  • Senior executive training to understand the importance
  • f ‘setting the right tone at the top’
  • Health & Safety legal review of H&S policy statement

and roles and responsibilities document

  • Accident response protocol
  • Avoid aggravating features
slide-37
SLIDE 37

Summary of Key points (2)

After an incident:

  • Challenge inappropriate enforcement notices
  • Obtain legal privilege over incident investigation report
  • Support for HSE interviews
slide-38
SLIDE 38

Questions?

Dr Simon Joyston-Bechal Turnstone Law sjb@turnstonelaw.com Mobile: 07880 684 781

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Turnstone Law Limited 2nd floor 107 Cheapside London EC2V 6DN T +44 (0) 20 3056 8856 www.turnstonelaw.com

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Barbour Presentation

Teresa Higgins, Sales Director, Barbour

#BarbourDirectors

slide-41
SLIDE 41
slide-42
SLIDE 42
slide-43
SLIDE 43
slide-44
SLIDE 44
slide-45
SLIDE 45
slide-46
SLIDE 46
slide-47
SLIDE 47
slide-48
SLIDE 48
slide-49
SLIDE 49
slide-50
SLIDE 50
slide-51
SLIDE 51
slide-52
SLIDE 52
slide-53
SLIDE 53
slide-54
SLIDE 54
slide-55
SLIDE 55
slide-56
SLIDE 56
slide-57
SLIDE 57

Thank you for attending Barbour Directors’ Club

#BarbourDirectors