AG v PAR Developments Limited [2007] JRC 061 (09 March 2007)

AG v PAR Developments Limited [2007] JRC 061 (09 March 2007)

The defendant company was in overall control of the worksite and failed to ensure a safe system of work, resulting in a high degree of risk and serious injury. Despite mitigation, a substantial fine is necessary to reinforce the paramount importance of workplace safety.

Citation
[2007] JRC 061
Parties
Defendant: Defendant company; Director of Defendant Company: Mr Philip Cadoret; Employee/victim: Mr Le Gros; Employee: Mr Green
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
09 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Health and Safety Prosecution / Sentencing Judgment
Outcome
conviction and fine
Legal Topics
Workplace Safety, Employer Liability, Sentencing, Duty of Care
Criminal Law Health and Safety Law Workplace Safety Employer Liability Sentencing Duty of Care

Case Brief

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Defendant company

Defendant

Mr Philip Cadoret

Director of Defendant Company

Mr Le Gros

Employee/victim

Mr Green

Employee

Procedural Posture

Health and Safety Prosecution / Sentencing Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant company breached health and safety obligations resulting in serious injury to an employee
  2. 2 Appropriate sentence for breach of workplace safety regulations

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant company was in overall control of the worksite and failed to ensure a safe system of work, resulting in a high degree of risk and serious injury. Despite mitigation, a substantial fine is necessary to reinforce the paramount importance of workplace safety.

Court Disposition

conviction and fine

Orders

  • Fine of £12,000 imposed on the defendant company
  • Costs of £2,500 awarded