Download file to see previous pages...
Corporate crimes have been and still continue to be in existence in all the organizations across all sectors and yet, until now, there hasnt been any statutory regulation that prohibits companies from indulging in such crimes and holds them accountable for any damage to an individuals life. Until now companies were required by law to pay civil damages in the form of compensation or fines as a gesture of acknowledgement of the loss suffered by the aggrieved party. However, considering the widespread existence of incidences of corporate manslaughter there is an urgent need for law to implement policies and legal restrictions on corporate organizations that act as a deterrent and help in preventing and controlling such crimes to a significant extent.
This paper on Criminal law attempts to study, analyze, investigate and discuss various aspects related to corporate homicide and corporate manslaughter in reference to the recent Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act, 2007.
Recently, in the U.K. a new act called the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act, 2007 has been passed with an intention of transferring additional liability on the organizations and in turn safeguarding the interests of the society as a whole by preventing and controlling corporate misbehavior. The new bill on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide, intends to bring companies and other similar corporate bodies in England and Wales under corporate jurisdiction, to be tried and prosecuted for misconduct and negligence towards duties, which leads to a death of any individual working for such organizations, in the same manner as any individual who is charged with criminal offence. The bill once passed would allow the prosecution of corporate entities for breach of health and safety laws in the specified regions1.
There has been widespread
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
James Gobert's analysis seems pointed, but it is if anything too charitable. The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act is a good step, but it is nothing like what needs to be instituted to deter widespread corporate manslaughter. George Monbiot puts it more strongly when he argues, “It is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, or a tap on the head with a steam hammer.
This research paper explores the liability of secondary parties in homicide in the UK as per common law and as per the existing criminal laws in UK.The operation of Western Legal Systems shows that the Criminal Law exhibits two separate paradigms of responsibility. One, where individual justice is paramount...
(Corporate Manslaughter, 2006)
A company can be held responsible for committing such a crime if there is a work related death in the company. The felony is essentially linked to whether a director or senior manager, in other words a "controlling mind or will" of the company is guilty of manslaughter.
Recently Law commission recommended the retention of the manslaughter by gross negligence and has made proposals to facilitate the conviction of companies for that offence.(The Fennel Report,1988)(2).In the light of these events, a discussion on those legal means by which a company can be brought in to justice for the individual's injuries and death ,deserves great importance.
Britain was amongst the first nations to develop rules to regulate how companies operate and introduced a company registration scheme in 1844. Company Law has developed over the years both in common law and through various Acts of Parliament, most recently the Companies Act 2006 which is the first major overhaul of company law in the U.K.
The US Court in 1909 held that corporations could be held liable criminally for acts or omissions including failure of an agent acting within the scope of his employment. Corporation will be held liable for the illegal acts of its employees if the employees act within the scope of their authority and intend to benefit the corporation.
Precisely, manslaughter can be classified into two. The first one is voluntary manslaughter, and the other is involuntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter can be distinguished as homicide if the death of a person is caused by an intentional act provided that the special requirements for the offences of murder, manslaughter, homicide at the request of the victim, complicity in suicide or infanticide are not fulfilled.
?corporate manslaughter,” which occurs when a workingman’s death is caused by gross negligence or failure of management to introduce and maintain basic safety standards. Although it has been duly criminalized in many countries, the law used to prosecute the offense is often