Corporate Manslaughter And Corporate Homicide Act 2007: A Case Study

“The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007(CMCHA) is a landmark in law” (CPS, n.d.). “The Act came into force on 6 April 2008 and for the first time clarifies the criminal liabilities of companies including large organisations where serious failures in the management of health and safety result in a fatality” (SHP Online, 2008).

Before the Act, “corporate manslaughter (‘corporate homicide' in Scotland) was an aspect of common law offense of Gross Negligence Manslaughter” (SHP Online, 2008). But, organisation could be found guilty of the crime, if ‘a directing mind' of the organization, “an individual of high rank, embody the company in its actions and decisions was also guilty of the crime” (SHP Online, 2008). “This is

The Act defines “‘organisation’ as bodies incorporated by law or charter, partnerships, trades unions and employers’ associations, as well as police forces and crown bodies. This opens the vast majority of organisations to liability” (SHP Online, 2008).

“Section 1 also establishes that on conviction, the offence of corporate manslaughter may be punishable by a fine — the Act does not set a limit on the penalty” (SHP Online, 2008). “Sections 2 — 7 define ‘duty of care’ in the context of corporate manslaughter” (SHP Online, 2008). “Section 8, sets out factors for the jury to consider in determining whether health and safety legislation was breached then if so:

• How serious the breach was.

• How much of a risk of death it posed” (CPS,

The biggest difference in these offences is that, the “health and safety offences can be proved without demonstrating that any injury was caused by the failure to ensure safety” (SGC, 2010).

Summary

According to Mark and Hsaio,“The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 clarified criminal liability and make companies accountable when serious management failures result in a breach in duty of care” (Mark and Hsaio, 2009).

The Act “is designed to complement existing health and safety offences, for which an organisation may still be prosecuted as an alternative to, or in addition to, the new offence” (Open University, n.d.).

The Act intended to hold organisation, corporation, as a whole liable rather than an individual, but senior individuals in the organisation can “still face prosecutions for the common law crime of gross negligence manslaughter”