No, I do not think so. We have retained the duty of care because it is already extant in law and because we believe it would reinforce the case against employers. Indeed, when being briefed on the Bill, I asked what would happen if a train that crashed after coming off the tracks killed not only passengers—the company would clearly have a duty of care to them—but bystanders. The legal advice on the Bill that I have received is that if that could reasonably have been foreseen, the duty of care would still apply in that case. I do not think that the position is quite as simple as the hon. Gentleman makes out. The retention of the duty of care is intended to strengthen the Bill rather than weaken it.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Reid of Cardowan
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 October 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
450 c199 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:34:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351838
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351838
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351838