Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Lyell of Markyate (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 11 January 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.


Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

I am delighted with the analogy given by the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn. My mind was led to the later acts of King Lear and Beachy Head—the noble and learned Lord, the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, and I falling down that great precipice that the almost blind king was looking at. But to get our feet back on the ground, if we look at Clause 1(4)(b), all that we find is an absolutely standard definition of gross negligence. The question that the noble Baroness, Lady Turner of Camden, rightly raised, because it is a very important question that we must answer correctly, is whether the standard for manslaughter should be negligence or gross negligence. If it is gross negligence, it would have to fall far below. I shall give a homely example. The noble Baroness—and, indeed, we—at home have vacuum cleaners. Occasionally someone will leave the vacuum cleaner in a slightly unfortunate place in the hall or some other room and people trip over it. That is probably negligent, if it happens—although it probably does not happen in the noble Baroness’s house, because she would not be so stupid. But I could easily be.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c142GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Accountability Armed forces Death Companies Crown immunity Corporate manslaughter Liability Health and safety Exemptions Government departments Police Prosecutions Management Public bodies Negligence
Legislation
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill 2005-06 to 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk