Blog
Rayner my parade! The importance of specialist advice.
Jemma Brimblecombe
In March 2020 SWS had pleaded guilty to 51 offences of breaching its environmental permits under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/675) (‘the Regulations’) between 2010 and 2015. SWS admitted to causing 6,971 illegal discharges of waste water over the offending period across 17 sites in Hampshire, Kent and West Sussex. These discharges, which lasted a total of 61,704 hours, were made into numerous conservation sites and protected areas, causing major environmental harm. Discharges into designated shellfish waters also adversely affected businesses which harvest the shellfish for human consumption, since the pollution caused the deterioration of shellfish quality.
This latest enforcement action follows further recent penalties imposed on Thames Water for similar offences which saw the company fined £4 million in May 2021, £2.3 million in March 2021, £2 million in July 2019, and £20 million in March 2017, then the largest water pollution case brought by the Environment Agency. SWS itself has 168 previous convictions or cautions under environmental legislation.
The maximum fine for the relevant offences under the Regulations is unlimited. The court will determine the level of fine with reference to the sentencing guidelines (‘the Guidelines’). These are discussed below with reference to how they appear to have been applied in the current case.
The Guidelines provide that the court must first assess the culpability of the company as either deliberate, reckless, negligent or of low/no culpability.
Reports on this case indicate that SWS’s conduct was determined by the court to have been deliberate.
The severity of harm caused by the offence is determined with reference to four categories, ranging from major, significant, minor and indicating only a risk of harm.
Reporting on the present case indicates that the various offences by SWS in the relevant period were found to have caused major harm, Category 1 in the Guidelines. This requires there to have been major damage to water quality and pollution that was widespread and pervasive with long lasting effects on human health or quality of life, animal health or flora.
The size of the defendant determines the starting point and range of any fine, with larger companies susceptible to receiving larger fines. Under the Guidelines a ‘large’ company, meaning one with a turnover or equivalent of £50 million and over, where their culpability has been assessed as ‘Deliberate’ and the harm level as ‘Category 1’ has a fine starting point of £1,000,000 with a range of £450,000 to £3,000,000. However, the Guidelines also provide that for ‘very large organisations’, where the defendant company’s turnover very greatly exceeds the threshold for ‘large’ companies, it is possible to move outside the suggested range to achieve a proportionate sentence. Given that SWS reported a turnover of £878 million in 2019-20 it appears evident that the court, in determining sentence, felt it appropriate to fine SWS on this basis.
Aggravating factors include having previous convictions, a history of non-compliance and warnings by the regulator, and the deliberate concealment of illegal activity. In delivering the sentence, Mr Justice Johnson stated that SWS’s offences were “aggravated by its previous persistent pollution of the environment over very many years”. The court was also told that SWS had deliberately presented a misleading picture of compliance to the Environment Agency. Indeed, SWS was fined £37.7 million in 2019 by Ofwat, the water sector regulator, for deliberately misreporting on the performance of its waste water treatment works.
In mitigation, SWS apologised and said it is committed to transparency, transformation and cultural change.
The court should consider whether there should be any reduction in sentence for assistance provided to the prosecution. Similarly, the court should take into account any potential reduction in sentence for a guilty plea. In the present case, SWS pleaded guilty to the offences.
Conclusion
Given the court’s overall assessment of the offending, it is perhaps of little surprise that such a large fine was imposed. Whilst the fine imposed marks a significant increase from the previous record fine given to a water company, this case marks the continuation of a trend seeing an increasingly punitive approach taken by the courts towards water companies guilty of pollution offences.
For more information on any issues raised in this blog post, please contact a member of our Criminal Litigation team.
Jonathan Grimes is a criminal lawyer specialising in serious and complex criminal cases. He represents individuals and organisations in all areas of financial services and business crime as well as health and safety and related areas. He also continues to advise in a wide variety of other criminal law matters with a particular emphasis on cases with an international aspect, including war crimes, extradition and INTERPOL. He provides advice during investigations, attending hundreds of interviews of many different kinds in the course of his career, and is experienced in defending prosecutions brought by a range of law enforcement agencies.
Charlie Roe is a trainee solicitor. He is currently in his fourth seat in the Criminal Litigation team, after having spent his first seat in the Regulatory team, his second seat in the Employment team and his third seat in the Public Law team.
This health, safety law and corporate manslaughter update provides a summary of news stories in the period April 2024 – September 2024.
This quarterly update provides a summary of a selection of news stories relating to health and safety law investigations and prosecutions, as well as key corporate manslaughter cases, in the period January 2024 – March 2024.
This quarterly update provides a summary of a selection of news stories relating to health and safety law investigations and prosecutions in the period October 2023 – December 2023.
This quarterly update provides a summary of a selection of news stories relating to health and safety investigations and prosecutions, as well as key corporate manslaughter cases, from the period July – September 2023.
This quarterly environmental law update provides a summary of news stories in the period July 2023 – September 2023.
On 7 September 2023 it was announced that charges were authorised by the CPS against North East London NHS Foundation Trust (NELFT), following an investigation by the Metropolitan Police into the death of 22-year-old patient Alice Figueiredo on 7 July 2015 at Goodmayes Hospital in Redbridge, East London.
This quarterly health, safety law and corporate manslaughter update provides a summary of a selection of news stories relating to health and safety investigations and prosecutions, as well as key corporate manslaughter cases, published in the period April 2023 – June 2023.
On 22 February 2023, FDS Waste Services (“FDS”) and company director, Philip Pidgley, were sentenced, respectively, to a £640,000 fine and six months suspended prison sentence, following their convictions for corporate manslaughter and offences under the Health and Safety at Work Act etc. 1974 (HSWA).
This quarterly health & safety and corporate manslaughter law update provides a summary of news stories in the period July 2022 – December 2022
This quarterly environmental law update provides a summary of news stories in the period July 2022 – December 2022.
The Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 come into force today, introducing new duties under the Fire Safety Order for responsible persons.
This quarterly environmental law update provides a summary of a cross-section of news stories in the period April 2022 - June 2022.
This quarterly update summarises a selection of news stories relating to health and safety investigations and prosecutions published in the period April – June 2022 as well as some of the key corporate manslaughter cases which have been brought in recent months.
This quarterly update provides a summary of a selection number of news stories relating to health and safety investigations and prosecutions, published in the period January - March 2022.
This quarterly environmental law update provides a summary of news stories in the period January 2022 – March 2022
This blogs considers the recent corporate manslaughter conviction of Deco-Pak and two other recent corporate manslaughter cases, Bosley Mill and Aster Healthcare and what they tell us about the current approach to this offence. In January 2022 a garden supplies firm, Deco-Pak was found guilty of corporate manslaughter following a fatal accident at the Deco-Pak premises in Hipperholme, West Yorkshire on 14 April 2017.
On 5 January 2022, Bupa pleaded guilty at Southwark Crown Court to breaches of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Bupa were ordered to pay a fine of £937,500 and prosecution costs of £104,000. This is the highest ever fine imposed for fire safety breaches under the Fire Safety Order in the UK.
This quarterly environmental law update provides a summary of news stories published in the period October – December 2021.
The built environment presents health and safety risks like no other sector. Whether it be the risk of falls from height, hazardous substances, trapped by items collapsing or overturning, fire or moving vehicles there are a wide range of hazards that need to be managed from the outset. Directors can be held personally liable when health and safety duties are breached. In this blog we explore the scope of personal liability for directors in the built environment.
Last week Assistant Commissioner Fire Safety, Paul Jennings of the London Fire Brigade stated that developers are ‘gaming the system’, looking to reach only the minimum standards required for building safety and ‘bending the rules’. AC Jennings explained that we are not seeing the cultural change within the built environment that we would expect, following the tragic events of the Grenfell Tower fire and the subsequent Hackitt review.
We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.
Jemma Brimblecombe
Charles Richardson
Oliver Oldman
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print