AG v Ray Wilkinson Builders Ltd [2002] JRC 143 (02 August 2002)

AG v Ray Wilkinson Builders Ltd [2002] JRC 143 (02 August 2002)

A significant fine is warranted to reflect the seriousness of the breach and to serve as a deterrent, but mitigating factors such as the company's remedial actions, payment to the injured party, and lack of prior safety concerns justify a reduced fine.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] JRC 143
Parties
Defendant: [Defendant Company]; Injured Party: Mr Wells; Prosecutor: Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
02 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
conviction and fine
Legal Topics
Workplace Injury, Employer Liability, Machine Safety, Sentencing
Criminal Law Health and Safety Law Employment Law Workplace Injury Employer Liability Machine Safety Sentencing

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

[Defendant Company]

Defendant

Mr Wells

Injured Party

Crown

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for a company following a serious workplace injury caused by outdated and unsafe machinery?
  2. 2 To what extent does the company's conduct and remedial actions affect sentencing?

Ratio Decidendi

A significant fine is warranted to reflect the seriousness of the breach and to serve as a deterrent, but mitigating factors such as the company's remedial actions, payment to the injured party, and lack of prior safety concerns justify a reduced fine.

Court Disposition

conviction and fine

Orders

  • Fine of £7,000 to be paid within 6 months
  • Costs of £2,000 to be paid within 6 months