Proceeding contribution from Lord Clinton-Davis (Labour) 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 think that the words that he omits for consideration are those that precede it. The paragraph reads, "““‘gross’ breach if the conduct alleged to amount to a breach of that duty falls far below””," or ““falls below””. What is wrong with the words ““fall below”” in those circumstances?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 688 c144GC
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:49:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368137
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368137
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_368137