Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Other subjects

This isn't corporate responsibility, surely?

10 replies

Janh · 10/02/2004 14:22

BBC News

How can one individual be charged for this?

OP posts:
handlemecarefully · 10/02/2004 14:36

I think its appalling. Perhaps she deserves the sack - who knows, but being charged with manslaughter!!!!

dinosaur · 10/02/2004 14:40

I think it is possible, if it can be shown that the individual has been grossly negligent in his/her conduct. I think it's quite a high standard of proof though - you would have to show e.g. that the particular individual was aware of the risk but failed to take any steps to prevent the risk recurring, or put procedures in place to deal with the risk, but was aware that those procedures were not working and did nothing about it.

WideWebWitch · 10/02/2004 14:42

If it isn't her/the council's responsibility to ensure safety at work (which seems to be the issue since it seems they're being charged under h&s legislation), then whose is it? After Paddington it seemed fair to me that Railtrack were responsible and it was corporate manslaughter, isn't this the same? May not be, there aren't many details are there?

Janh · 10/02/2004 14:45

Oh, yes, the council is responsible - I hadn't thought of what dinosaur said, that she might have been negligent in not taking action over something that had been notified as a risk.

I was thinking (lacking any other information) that she was being charged just as head of the relevant department.

Also, I should have titled this "this IS corporate responsibility" - sorry - I meant not individual responsibility....

OP posts:
dinosaur · 10/02/2004 14:48

I think as www said there aren't really enough details in the BBC piece for it to be terribly clear.

sobernow · 10/02/2004 14:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

handlemecarefully · 10/02/2004 14:53

I had also read it (perhaps misread it) as her personally being charged with manslaughter. Wouldn't argue with a corporate manslaughter charge...

Janh · 10/02/2004 14:59

That is what it said, hmc - that's what got me going (heard it on the lunchtime news so looked it up here). The council is ALSO charged but she is named first.

OP posts:
bundle · 10/02/2004 15:06

gosh, I gave blood in that building once, when I was working for a couple of months in Barrow.
I agree it seems a bit harsh unless she made a decision which directly led to slipshod maintenance of the the air con system.

Cam · 11/02/2004 14:11

I think the law changed fairly recently so that individuals can be charged whereas previously only the corporation could have been. I think it was after the various train crashes.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page