My hon. Friend is right.
Our fourth concern is with how the Bill is constructed, particularly with respect to the duty of care that corporations and organisations have to bestow on the victim before they can be accused of an offence. We believe that that unduly limits the new offence and that focusing on the civil law definition of duty of care rather than the law of negligence and criminal law amounts to a restriction. For example, one could imagine an organisation, especially if it is a public body, having a statutory duty under health and safety legislation, but no duty of care. Once again, that illustrates a problem with the approach. Surely every organisation owes a public duty not to kill a person by its gross negligence. It is a simple as that. Linking the issue only to duty of care tests under civil law does not go far enough.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Ed Davey
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c226 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:34:54 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351891
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351891
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351891