I greatly regret that I have to oppose the amendment. Without the word ““far””, the subsection would read as the test for an ordinary action for damages for negligence. The whole purpose of the word ““gross”” is that there must be something more than that for the criminal law of manslaughter. The word ““far”” is critical here in the definition of ““gross negligence””. Without it, for example, liability for corporate manslaughter would occur far more frequently than liability for ordinary cases of manslaughter. We cannot have different tests for manslaughter by individuals and manslaughter by companies.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lloyd of Berwick
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 11 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c140GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:45:01 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368124
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368124
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368124