Preview

Unit 24

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3866 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Unit 24
Unit 24: Aspects of Criminal law relating to Business

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 allow companies and organisations to be guilty of these offences where serious managerial failures result in gross breach of a duty of care. This Act created a new offence of corporate manslaughter to apply to companies, government departments, police forces etc. However, before this Act was introduced, a corporation could only be convicted of manslaughter if a single employee of the company committed all the fundamentals of the offence and was considered ‘senior’ enough to be seen as exemplifying the "mind" or ‘brain’ of the corporation. Due to these limitations, convictions were rare and it was felt that corporations had escaped punishment.
The offence is concerned with corporate liability and does not apply to directors or other senior individuals, who may have other senior members beneath them in the company or organisation. The police investigate suspected cases of corporate manslaughter and prosecution decisions are made by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). An organisation will be guilty of the new offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised causes death and equals to a gross breach of a duty of care to the deceased. The new test requires juries to consider; * how the fatal action was managed or controlled throughout the organisation, including any systems and processes for managing safety * to take into consideration any health and safety breaches by the organisation * and to analyse how serious and dangerous those failures were, and how relevant they were to the fatality.
If an organisation is proven to be guilty of the offence, it is liable for an unlimited fine. The Act also provides for courts to impose a publicity order, where the organisation is required to publicise details of its conviction and fine. This, to certain extents, is done to put the organisation under ‘shame’, so that they have

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Unfortunately, a corporation can be charged and convicted of any number of crimes. If the employees or officers within a corporation violate the law on behalf of the corporation and within the scope of their employment, the corporate entity would be open to criminal charges. Corporations can be convicted of criminal wrongdoing in the same manner individuals are charged and convicted. In addition, individuals within the corporation can be charged as well. Commonly, when a corporation is charged, many of the top officers will be charged along with the corporation as an entity.…

    • 604 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Unit 29

    • 561 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Amazon is an online retailer however there have been talks and news articles of the company planning to open a warehouse store in New York City. However being an online only retailer means the company can meet any customer target and offer shopping to anyone. This removes travel time, travel costs and parking costs which appeal to more customers. This can also appeal to younger shoppers aged 16+ who are unable to drive and must pay out a large charge in travel fare. There is also a larger reach in the consumer area and they now have the ability to reach a worldwide target. Also being an online only business they can give specific and limited discounting to their products.…

    • 561 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bhm443 Mod 4 Case (Tu()

    • 1002 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Corporations, by legal charter, are not a single entity and do not have a central owner; however, this does not keep corporations from being liable for criminal actions or criminal liability. Corporate criminal liability in law determines to what extent a corporation, basically a fictitious entity, can be held liable for acts and omissions of actual people that the corporation employs. In 1909, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a corporation “could be held criminally liable for the acts, omissions, or failures of an agent acting within the scope of his employment” (Carrasco & Dupee, 1999). Corporations themselves cannot do actions and so criminal liability falls to the employees of the corporation and two elements comprise criminal violations by corporate employees; intent and the guilty act. Carrasco and Dupee (1999), state, “For a corporation to be liable, the employee committing the illicit act must be acting within the scope of her employment”. This requirement is generally met if the employee has actual or apparent authority to engage in the particular act in question and the corporation can give either direct authority or authority through perceived authority (Carrasco & Dupee, 1999). Under federal law, a corporation is criminally responsible for the actions of any of its employees taken within the scope of their employment for the benefit of the corporation. It makes no difference whether the employees’ conduct violates corporate policy or contravenes explicit instructions not to engage in the conduct (Hasnas, 2006). Under this presumption and law of corporate criminal responsibility “there is nothing a corporation can do to ensure that it is not guilty of a criminal offense. Corporate managers know that no matter how good their firm’s internal controls, they cannot guarantee that there will be no intentional or inadvertent violations of law by its employees” (Hasnas, 2006). If an employee is…

    • 1002 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Cross 9e TBB Ch07

    • 2373 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Corporate officers and directors may be held criminally liable for the actions of employees under their supervision.…

    • 2373 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Study-James Hardie

    • 435 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Piercing the corporate veil is not the only means by which a director or officer of a corporation can be held liable for the actions of the corporation. Liability can be established through conventional theories of contract, agency, or tort law. For example, in situations where a director or officer acting on behalf of a corporation personally commits a tort, he and the corporation are jointly liable and it is unnecessary to discuss the issue of piercing the corporate veil. The doctrine is often used in cases where liability is found, but the corporation is insolvent.…

    • 435 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Why Milgram Is Wrong

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Take for example college entrance exams. If you ask someone how they scored, before they tell you their score they will give you an entire back story. It usually details a long list of things that detracted from their score that clearly were out of the individual’s control. The same principle rang true in the Milgram experiment. The individuals in were more obliged to continue to administer shocks to the ‘learners’ if the experimenter seemed to take responsibility for their suffering. This is a concept that the business world struggles with because how does one hold a single individual accountable for the actions of an entire corporation? On the contrary, what actions can be taken to hold a corporation accountable rather than just its agents? In order to restore the credibility and reputation of businesses, these choices need to be made…

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    “Leading firms in a range of fields, including energy, banking, auditing and investment have been assessed huge fines for unethical dealings. Executives have been jailed.” (Houlahan, 2011)…

    • 2242 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Lessons from Longford

    • 4089 Words
    • 17 Pages

    References: Appleton, B. (1994). Piper Alpha. In T. Kletz (Ed.), Lessons from Disaster: How Organisations Have No Memory and Accidents Recur . (pp. 174-184). London: Institute of Chemical Engineers. Bahr, N. (1997), System Safety Engineering and Risk Assessment: a Practical Approach London: Taylor and Francis Dawson, D &B Brooks, (1999) The Esso Longford Gas Plant Accident: Report of the Longford Royal Commission. Melbourne: Parliament of Victoria Hopkins, A. (1999) Managing Major Hazards: the Lessons of the Moura Mine Disaster, Sydney: Allen & Unwin Hopkins, A. (2000) Lessons from Longford: The Esso Gas Plant Explosion. Sydney: CCH Australia, phone1300 300 224 NOHSC -National OHS Commission - (1996) Control of Major Hazard Facilities: National Standard. Canberra: AGPS Reason, J. (1997), Managing the Risks of Organisational Accidents. Alderlshot: Ashgate Txxxx. This refers to the transcript page number which were obtained from http://www.vgrs.vic.gov.au/client?file.wcn. There is no hard copy of the transcript available publicly; interested readers should contact the author who has a downloaded version.…

    • 4089 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Corporate crime is extremely difficult to detect for many reasons. One major reason is that many people do not realise a crime is being committed as corporate crime is often seen as a victimless crime. At face value this may seem to be the case but if you look deeper you will see that this is not true. Every year the FBI estimates that 19,000 Americans are murdered every year compared with the 56,000 Americans who die every year from occupational disease such as black lung and asbestosis (Russell Mokhiber 2000). Deaths Caused by corporate crime are also very indirect so it can be very difficult to trace the problem to the corporation.…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Corporate Crime Assignment

    • 2795 Words
    • 12 Pages

    Central to this discussion on criminal liability of corporations versus the liability of individuals within the corporation is the concept of corporate criminal liability. The paper will firstly introduce and discuss the concept of corporate criminal liability. This paper further attempts to discuss the different views held by scholars regarding the imposition of criminal liability on a corporation, specifically whether the corporation as an artificial person should be vicariously liable for its actions, or whether individuals within the…

    • 2795 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When business firms are charged with infractions, and when there is legal investigation on the managers of those firms,…

    • 2351 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    However, there may have differences and changes made by common law; the concept of lifting corporate veil is still important and arguable. Under Common Law the courts will lifted the corporate veil generally in four situations: where a company is used for fraud, avoidance of legal obligations, breach of director’s fiduciary duties and attributing mind and will of company. The case of Gilford Motor Co. Ltd v Horne shows that the courts will not allow a company to be used as a device to mask the carrying on of a business by a former…

    • 1595 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Directors of companies under investigation should also be aware of further provisions of Law No. 31/1999 which impose heavy custodial sentences and fines on those who prevent, hinder or foil, investigations and lawsuits, or who provide false information to the authorities or to the court.…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Many cases concerning various fields of daily life including those that trace back to the early time when corporations appeared demonstrate that a company could be prosecuted for a criminal offence.5 What may incur debates is whether the criminal offence could make a company criminally liable.…

    • 1334 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    References: 1. Directors’ Personal Liability for Corporate Fault : A Comparative Analysis, Helen Anderson, Kluwer Law International 2008,…

    • 1002 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays