Court cuts £700k Whirlpool fine to £300k on appeal
Wednesday 10th January 2018
From the archive: Just so you know, this article is more than 3 years old.
Barrister Dominic Adamson, who represented the company, said the sentencing judge His Honour Judge Patrick had "erred" in his application of the sentencing guidelines and that the original sentence was "manifestly excessive".
On 21 March 2015 Clive Dalley, a 66-year-old contractor, was standing on a 5 m high elevating mobile platform (MEWP) installing fire detection equipment at Whirlpool's factory at Yate, near Bristol. Elsewhere in the factory maintenance staff started an overhead conveyor, unaware of Dalley's presence. The movement destabilised the MEWP, toppling it and dropping him to the floor.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found there was no supervision or controls to prevent the conflicting tasks being carried out.
Whirlpool admitted breaching s 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act but challenged the sentence on the basis that the trial judge had wrongly applied the sentencing guidelines.
At the original sentencing hearing at Bristol Crown Court in March 2017, Judge Patrick determined that though Whirlpool's culpability was low and there was a low likelihood of harm (harm category 3), the seriousness of harm risked was the highest (level A). He said the company's turnover placed it above the £50m threshold for a large organisation under the guidelines and set a starting point for the fine at £1.2m, reduced to £700,000 to reflect mitigating factors and an early guilty plea.
However at the Court of Appeal on 20 December, Lord Chief Justice Burnett said this figure was too high.
While he agreed with the trial judge that Whirlpool should be treated as a 'very large' company, he noted there should be "no mechanistic extrapolation for levels for large companies".
In 2014 and 2015 Whirlpool's turnover was £672.8m and £710.8m respectively.
The Court of Appeal noted that the starting point fine for a 'large' organisation is £35,000, which it adjusted to £250,000 (the top end of the next category range) to reflect the fact that a worker was fatally injured. The court then increased this further to take account of Whirlpool's very large status and set a starting point of £500,000.
This was reduced by £50,000 for mitigating factors, and then by one third for an early guilty plea, resulting in a £300,000 penalty.
The proactive inspections will review safety and health standards in food manufacturing businesses across the country, focusing on two of the main causes of ill-health in the sector. These are occupational asthma from exposure to flour dust in bakeries, cake and biscuit factories, and grain mills; and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) such as lower back pain and upper limb disorders from manual handling activities and repetitive tasks.
Two IKO Design employees were re-siting a heater and installing a new chimney flue on 31 October 2014 when one of them fell through a skylight.He died from his injuries six months later, Leicester Crown Court was told. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) served an immediate prohibition notice after it found there was no safe access to a tower scaffold and no safe working platform. IKO had also failed to provide workers with personal protective equipment.
The committee, a monitoring body of the 47-nation Council of Europe, ruled on 24 January that a change in UK law in 2015 which removed certain self-employed work from the HSW Act, breached the UK’s international obligations.Although the committee recognised that only those in relatively less risky work were not now covered by health and safety regulations, it added that the UK was failing to live up to its commitments in the charter.
The group is seeking evidence from interested stakeholders until 2 March 2018, after which date it will consider the evidence and produce a report with recommendations on how to reduce the frequency of such accidents. The APPG, which was formed in October 2017, is chaired by Glasgow Central MP Alison Thewliss and sponsored by the Prefabricated Access Suppliers’ and Manufacturers’ Association (PASMA) and Access Industry Forum (AIF).
High-risk and complex buildings - defined as those “where multiple people live or stay and for which exceptional events could lead to the risk of large-scale fatalities” – are subject to regulations which are too complex and poorly implemented, says the report.The report calls for “simplified and unambiguous” regulations and guidance on fire safety. It says as an interim measure the government should consider “presentational changes” to improve the clarity of Approved Document B, which accompanies the Building Regulations.
Hull Crown Court was told that Tata Steel employee Thomas Standerline, 26, was standing inside a cage while inspecting a crane in April 2010. An overhead crane travelled over the edge of his cage and trapped him, leading to instant death. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that, even after the occurrence of two incidents prior to Standerline’s death, Tata Steel had failed to enforce its own safety procedures. It also found that the overhead crane in question should not have been in operation.