The document summarizes recent developments related to corporate manslaughter legislation in the UK and provides guidance on data protection and dealing with hospitality following the UK Bribery Act. It notes that three companies have been successfully prosecuted under the corporate manslaughter legislation, with fines ranging from £187,500 to £480,000. It warns businesses to be vigilant and implement proper safety practices to avoid similar prosecutions. Regarding data protection, it outlines the key principles businesses must follow when collecting and storing personal information. It also advises that hospitality is allowed if reasonable and for legitimate business purposes, but businesses should implement internal policies and risk assessments to prevent allegations under the Bribery Act.

1. Comply
Davies and Partners Solicitors
Winter 2012/13 · www.daviesandpartners.com
“ Welcome to this Winter 2012 edition of Comply. The Compliance and Regulatory
Law Unit has, since the last edition, been involved in very complex cases including
cases with the Office of Fair Trading, one of which went to the European Court.
In this edition we look at the development of the case law involving Corporate
Manslaughter as well as Data Protection and also how to deal with hospitality following
the Bribery Act 2010. If you would like to discuss any of the issues covered in this
edition or any matters relating to Regulation and Compliance, please feel free to contact
me or any of the team.
Greg Tay-Lodge, Partner ”
Corporate Manslaughter – legislation starting to bite
The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate and struck Mr Wilson who died from fatal head
Homicide Act came into force four years ago injuries. Here the company pleaded guilty to
and since its inception only three companies breaching the Act and was ordered to pay a fine
have been successfully prosecuted under it of £187,500.
namely Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings, JMW Both of these companies were relatively
Farms Ltd and Lion Steel Limited. small but still faced fairly hefty fines. It should
In the Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings case also be noted that the Court was told (in the
Mr Wright had been left working alone in a 3.5m Geotech case) that the company would be unable
deep trench. A short time after he was left on to pay such a high fine and the imposition of
his own to ‘finish up’ the trench collapsed on such a fine would probably mean the liquidation Now although there are only three completed
Mr Wright and buried him. The managing of the company and loss of livelihood, however cases to have hit the headlines, apparently
director Peter Eaton had initially faced charges this was not seen as particularly relevant to the there are in the region of 50 cases under referral
of manslaughter by gross negligence and health Judge. to the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism
and safety offences in a personal capacity but In the third case of Lion Steel Limited an Division where corporate manslaughter is
these were dropped due to his ill health. employee suffered fatal injuries when he fell considered. It is therefore quite likely that more
The company was charged with corporate through a fragile roof panel at the company’s companies will be facing prosecution in the
manslaughter and was found guilty. It was factory. The company admitted the charge of near future.
ordered by Winchester Crown Court to pay a corporate manslaughter and was subsequently The message is clear, the authorities are
£385,000 penalty. fined £480,000 and ordered to pay £84,000 not afraid to use this legislation. Therefore
In the JMW Farm Ltd case Mr Wilson (who toward the prosecutions costs. This is by far the businesses need to be on guard or face being
had been working in the company’s meal-mixing biggest fine to date and was in fact reduced by in a similar situation to the companies above.
farm in County Armagh) was struck when a 20% due to the guilty plea of the company and The impact on a business could be cata-
metal bin fell from the raised forks of a forklift the judge being concerned about the future of strophic in itself but don’t forget the personal
truck. The bin had not been attached properly the company’s 142 employees. impact of facing charges as an individual.
CONTACT US
BRISTOL 135 Aztec West, Almondsbury, THE COMPLIANCE TEAM
Bristol BS32 4UB
Tel 01454 619619 · Fax 01454 619696
BIRMINGHAM Latham House,
33–34 Paradise Street, Birmingham B1 2AJ
Tel 0121 616 4450 · Fax 0121 643 3928
GLOUCESTER Rowan House, Barnett Way,
Barnwood, Gloucester GL4 3RT
Tel 01452 612345 · Fax 01452 611922
LONDON 35 Harley Street, London W1G 9QU
Tel 020 7487 4361/020 3214 4055
Fax 020 7637 0211
Greg Tay-Lodge Nigel Tillott Sarah Whittock Diana Eames

2. www.daviesandpartners.com
A summer full of events –
Can we still entertain?
This summer we have seen a host of
spectacular events to watch including the
Olympics. We are now heading towards
Christmas and businesses may be thinking
about gifts or invites to other events. Yet there
Data Protection – brief guidance is still concern amongst businesses of the
impact of the Bribery Act 2010 which came
Headlines regarding data protection are still must be followed. In summary these principles into force last year.
appearing on a fairly regular basis. Businesses state that data must be: The question many are asking is should a
are still in some ways struggling with the 1. Fairly and lawfully processed. company take up a corporate hospitality package
actual requirements of the Data Protection and send out those invitations. Despite the
2. Processed for limited purposes, i.e. only
Act. So what is it all about? possible social and economic perception of a
obtained for one or more specified and lawful
The Data Protection Act 1998 is the current ‘jolly’ provided proper procedures are followed
purposes and must not be processed further
governing legislation. The aim of the legislation there is no reason why companies should not
in any manner incompatible with that
is to protect the individual and harmonise UK be able to make use of these events to promote
purpose
law with other member states. The scheme of their business.
3. Adequate, relevant and not excessive in The two offences under the Act which
the Act is to require a ‘data controller’ to be
relation to the purpose or purposes for which particularly relate to corporate hospitality are
registered before he can lawfully process the
they are processed i.e. an employer should section 1 which is offering, promising or making
personal data about a data subject.
only hold the personal data it actually needs a bribe to an individual; or Section 6 which
A data controller is any business which uses
and processes data – pretty much anyone who 4. Accurate and where necessary kept up to relates to bribing a foreign official.
has a customer or employee! The data subject date Both offences refer to the provision of a
is the individual about whom information is 5. Not kept longer than necessary for that financial or other advantage which could easily
processed or used. Personal data is the purpose catch the invitation to a sporting event. What
individual’s name combined with information will be the distinguishing factor is the intent
6. Processed in accordance with the data
such as address, telephone number and behind the invitation. Was it an invitation to
subject’s rights
hobbies but not a name on its own or incidental promote a business to a prospective client or
7. Secure. A business should take appropriate was it an attempt to curry favour with an
mention of a name in business minutes.
technical and organisational measures individual who is for example key to a decision
In other words before anyone can obtain or
against unauthorised or unlawful processing making process on a tendering application.
deal with any personal information about an
of personal data and against accidental loss However companies must note that when
identifiable individual in a systematic way that
or destruction of or damage to personal data. dealing with foreign officials the bar for being
data controller must be on a publicly accessible
So for example if you use third parties to court is even lower. Here it is sufficient for the
register. Once on the register and in a position
process information for you, you should have official to be merely influenced for the act to be
to deal with the data the data controller may
in place written contracts to ensure that they caught under the Act.
deal with the data only for the purposes and
will abide by the data protection principles on So what is the risk to your business?
within the limits imposed by the Act and even
your behalf Provided the hospitality is commensurate with
then some sensitive personal data will require
8. Not transferred to countries without the reasonable and proportionate norms of the
further special treatment and protection.
adequate protection. industry sector then it is unlikely to be seen as
When personal information is collected,
an issue. You may have seen headlines about
used or stored by a business it has an obligation There are exemptions but don’t rely on them!!
‘lavish’ corporate packages being provided to
to protect that information from being They mainly relate to matters of public interest
individuals in relation to the Olympics.
improperly used or distributed. So if you give such as national security, crime, taxation, social
Lavishness is not in itself the test as to whether
your information to a bank or gas supplier there work, examination marks, legal professional
there was an unlawful intention but it will be an
will be certain information you might not want privilege etc.
indicator as to whether they give rise to an
them to disclose to another business without The DPA is overseen by the Information
increase in adverse inference on the individual
your consent. Commissioner (‘IC’) who enforces the DPA
benefiting from the hospitality. Key questions
The individual whose details are being held provisions. They are an independent super-
to ask are:
or used also has a right to know exactly what visory authority reporting directly to Parliament.
information is being held and the reasons why, Their duties include the promotion of good 1. Is the gift or hospitality reasonable and
so they can access that data, for example information handling and the encouragement proportionate?
information held by credit reference agencies of codes of practice for data controllers. They 2. Is there a legitimate business purpose?
may be incorrect and clearly you would want to also publish legal guidance notes. If the IC 3. What are the companies in the same sector
resolve this. posts an enforcement order and this is not met doing?
Information can be processed manually or by then criminal sanctions against the company 4. Does the gift or hospitality confirm with your
automated systems. Both methods are caught and in certain circumstances directors and/or own internal policies?
by the Act. It affects all businesses no matter officers of the company could be imposed Remember if you have not already done so, you
how big. together with unlimited fines. It could also lead should carry out a risk assessment to ascertain
There are 8 data protection principles which to serious reputational damage of the company. what procedures need to be put in place.