|
|
|
R v.
F. Howe and Son Engineers Limited |
|
Date |
1998 |
|
Issue |
Appeal against fines and costs. Previous plea of guilty for, failing
to ensure safety of equipment, failing to ensure safety of employees
and failing to create a risk assessment. |
|
Court |
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
|
Act, Regulation or Reference |
Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s. 2(1)
The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989, reg. 11
|
|
Facts |
A fatal accident which occurred in 1996 when G Smith, who was a 20
year old employee of the appellant was electrocuted. He was using an
electric vacuum machine which had defective wiring. The machine had
been purchased second hand by F Howe and Son in 1995. The cable to
the machine became trapped between one of its wheels and the floor,
causing damage to the wiring so that the machine became live. Mr.
Smith was holding it at the time and was unable to let go until the
power was turned off. He was taken to hospital where he was
certified dead.
The company pleaded guilty to offences under the Act and
Regulations for failing to ensure the safety of its employees and
the safety of equipment etc. It was find £48,000 with £7,500 costs.
H Howe appealed the fines.
|
|
The Decision |
F Howe and Son was a small company with limited resources., and so
The full burden fell upon the company as neither the fines nor the
costs were tax-deductible. In the court's judgment an appropriate
fine was one totalling £15,000. This was imposed on the first count
of the indictment (failing to ensure so far as is reasonably
practicable the safety at work of employees, Health and Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974. 2(1), with no separate penalty in respect of the
other offences. The order for costs remained the same. The total
financial penalty was reduced from £55,500 to £22,500. |
|
Note |
In the court's opinion, the judge in Bristol Crown Court had given
insufficient weight to the financial position of the company. It may
have been that he did so because the financial information that he
had was not provided until the very last moment.
A fine needs to be large enough to bring that message home where the
defendant is a company not only to those who manage it but also to
its shareholders. The objective of prosecutions for H&S offences in
the work place is to achieve a
safe environment for those who work there and for other members of
the public who may be affected.
|
|
Other cases of interest |
|
|
External links |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|