Home / LEV Testing / Guide
Workplace safety - the law
Corporate manslaughter is the offence that lets an organisation itself - not just individuals - be prosecuted when the way it's run causes a death. It applies where management failures amount to a gross breach of a duty of care. It's a serious backstop to workplace safety law, and understanding it explains why getting safety management right matters at the top of an organisation, not just the shop floor. Here is what it means, in plain terms. This is general information, not legal advice.
The short answer
Most workplace safety law is about preventing harm - and most enforcement, if things go wrong, is about breaches of health and safety duties. Corporate manslaughter sits above that as a serious backstop: the offence that lets an organisation itself be prosecuted for causing a death through the way it's run. Understanding it explains why safety has to be managed properly at the top of an organisation. Here's what it means, in plain terms. This is general information, not legal advice. What corporate manslaughter is. Corporate manslaughter is a criminal offence that allows an organisation itself - a company, or other body - to be prosecuted when the way it's managed or organised causes a person's death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care. It's set out in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (in Scotland, the offence is called corporate homicide). The important thing it changed is that the organisation as a whole can be held criminally liable for a death, based on its collective management failings - rather than the law having to pin the blame on one guilty individual. So it targets organisational, systemic failure. The key elements. For an organisation to be guilty, several elements must be present. A death: someone must have died. Caused by the way the organisation was managed or organised: the death must result from how the organisation's activities were run - its systems, management and organisation - not merely an isolated act unconnected to that. A relevant duty of care: the organisation must have owed the person a relevant duty of care (for example, the duty an employer owes its employees, or a duty owed to others affected by the organisation's activities). A gross breach: the organisation's conduct must have fallen far below what could reasonably be expected of it in the circumstances - not just a breach, but a gross one (a serious falling-short). A substantial senior management element: the way the organisation's senior management managed or organised its activities must be a substantial element of the breach. Senior management means the people who play significant roles in decisions about how the whole or a substantial part of the organisation's activities are managed. So it's about failures at the top and in the systems, not just a frontline slip. These elements together mean corporate manslaughter is about serious, systemic, senior-level failure causing death. Who is liable. Liability falls on the organisation itself, not on individuals. A company convicted of corporate manslaughter is the defendant - the conviction is against the organisation. Individuals aren't convicted of corporate manslaughter (though individuals can face separate charges, such as gross negligence manslaughter, and health and safety offences, in connection with the same events). So corporate manslaughter is specifically the route to holding the organisation criminally responsible. The penalties. The penalties are serious. They include: unlimited fines (there's no cap - fines can be very large, scaled to the organisation); remedial orders (requiring the organisation to put right the failings that led to the death); and publicity orders (requiring the organisation to publicise the fact of its conviction, the fine, and the failings - a reputational penalty). So a conviction carries financial, corrective and reputational consequences. What it means for workplace safety. For workplace safety, corporate manslaughter means that managing safety properly is a duty that reaches the top of an organisation. Because the offence turns on systemic failures and the way senior management ran things, it makes clear that safety can't be treated as just a frontline or paperwork matter - the organisation's systems, its management arrangements, and its leadership's decisions about how work is managed all bear on whether it's meeting its duties. Systemic, senior-level failures that cause a death can put the organisation itself in the dock. So it's a powerful reason for organisations to manage safety seriously at every level: to have proper risk assessments and controls, to follow the law (including specific duties like controlling hazardous substances and maintaining safety-critical equipment), to act on known risks, and to make safety part of how the organisation is run - not to leave gaps that a systemic failure could fall through. Good day-to-day safety management (controlling real hazards, maintaining controls, keeping records, acting on risks) is both what protects people and what keeps an organisation clear of this kind of liability. The takeaway. So corporate manslaughter is the offence that holds an organisation itself criminally responsible when the way it's managed causes a death amounting to a gross breach of a duty of care, with senior management's failings a substantial element - set out in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, and carrying unlimited fines, remedial orders and publicity orders. For workplace safety, it makes proper, serious safety management a duty that reaches the top of the organisation. This is general information, not legal advice - seek proper advice on your legal duties. This is general information.
Key points
What it is
Corporate manslaughter is a criminal offence that allows an organisation itself - a company, or other body - to be prosecuted when the way it's managed or organised causes a person's death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care. It's set out in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (in Scotland, the offence is called corporate homicide).
The important thing about it is that the organisation as a whole can be held criminally liable for a death, based on its collective management failings - rather than the law having to identify and convict one guilty individual (which had made it hard to hold large organisations to account for deaths caused by systemic failures). So corporate manslaughter targets organisational, systemic failure: it's about how the organisation as a whole was run, not solely one person's act. This is what makes it a serious backstop to workplace safety - it puts the organisation, and how it manages safety, directly in question when a death results. So what it is - prosecuting the organisation itself for a death - is the core: the offence holds the organisation criminally responsible for fatal management failures. What has to be shown is next. So it makes the organisation itself answerable for a death. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
The key elements
For an organisation to be guilty, several elements must be present. There must be a death. It must be caused by the way the organisation's activities were managed or organised - resulting from how the organisation was run (its systems, management and organisation), not merely an isolated act unconnected to that. The organisation must have owed the person a relevant duty of care (for example, an employer's duty to its employees, or a duty to others affected by its activities).
And two elements define the seriousness. A gross breach: the organisation's conduct must have fallen far below what could reasonably be expected of it in the circumstances - not just any breach, but a gross one (a serious falling-short). And a substantial senior management element: the way the organisation's senior management managed or organised its activities must be a substantial element of the breach. Senior management means the people who play significant roles in decisions about how the whole or a substantial part of the organisation's activities are managed. So the offence is about failures at the top and in the systems, not just a frontline slip - it turns on how the organisation was run at a senior level. So the key elements - gross breach, and a senior management failure - define corporate manslaughter as serious, systemic, senior-level failure causing death. So it's about grave, top-level, systemic failings. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
Who is liable
Liability for corporate manslaughter falls on the organisation itself, not on individuals. A company convicted of corporate manslaughter is the defendant - the conviction is against the organisation as a body, reflecting that the offence is about collective, organisational failure. So individuals are not convicted of corporate manslaughter.
That doesn't mean individuals are never held responsible in connection with a workplace death - they can be, but through different routes: individuals can face separate charges such as gross negligence manslaughter (the offence for an individual whose gross negligence causes a death), and health and safety offences, arising from the same events. So a fatal workplace incident can lead to the organisation being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter and individuals being prosecuted separately under other offences. But the corporate manslaughter charge specifically is the route to holding the organisation criminally responsible. So who is liable - the organisation, not individuals - clarifies the offence's target: it makes the organisation as a whole answerable, with individual liability handled by other offences. So the organisation is the defendant for this offence. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
The penalties
The penalties for corporate manslaughter are serious. They include unlimited fines: there's no cap, so fines can be very large, scaled to the organisation and the seriousness - a significant financial penalty. They include remedial orders: the court can require the organisation to put right the failings that led to the death (to fix the specific problems), so the penalty isn't only punitive but also corrective. And they include publicity orders: the court can require the organisation to publicise the fact of its conviction, the fine imposed, and the failings involved - a reputational penalty that makes the conviction public.
So a corporate manslaughter conviction carries financial (unlimited fine), corrective (remedial order) and reputational (publicity order) consequences together. This combination is deliberately weighty, reflecting the gravity of an organisation's management failures having caused a death. For an organisation, the prospect of an unlimited fine plus a public, court-ordered admission of fatal failings is a serious matter - a strong reason (beyond the moral one of protecting life) to manage safety properly. So the penalties - unlimited fines, remedial and publicity orders - underline the offence's seriousness: the consequences of a conviction are large and public. What this all means for safety management is next. So the penalties are financial, corrective and reputational. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
What it means for safety
For workplace safety, corporate manslaughter means that managing safety properly is a duty that reaches the top of an organisation. Because the offence turns on systemic failures and the way senior management ran things, it makes clear that safety can't be treated as just a frontline or paperwork matter - the organisation's systems, its management arrangements, and its leadership's decisions about how work is managed all bear on whether it's meeting its duties. Systemic, senior-level failures that cause a death can put the organisation itself in the dock.
So it's a powerful reason for organisations to manage safety seriously at every level: to have proper risk assessments and controls; to follow the law (including specific duties like controlling hazardous substances under COSHH, and maintaining safety-critical equipment like LEV); to act on known risks rather than leaving them; and to make safety part of how the organisation is run, from the board down. Good day-to-day safety management - controlling real hazards, maintaining controls, keeping records, acting on risks - is both what protects people and what keeps an organisation clear of this kind of liability. The two go together: an organisation that genuinely manages its real risks is protecting its people and, in doing so, guarding against the systemic failure this offence punishes. So what it means for safety - safety management reaches the top - is the practical lesson: corporate manslaughter makes proper, serious, organisation-wide safety management a duty owned at the top, not just the floor. So manage safety seriously, from the top down. This is general information, not legal advice - seek proper advice on your duties. This is general information.
Questions
It's the criminal offence letting an organisation itself (not just individuals) be prosecuted when the way it's managed or organised causes a death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care; it's set out in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (corporate homicide in Scotland). Corporate manslaughter is a criminal offence that allows an organisation itself - a company or other body, not just individual people - to be prosecuted when the way it's managed or organised causes a person's death and amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care. It's set out in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (in Scotland, the offence is called corporate homicide). The important change it made is that the organisation as a whole can be held criminally liable for a death, based on its collective management failings - rather than the law having to pin the blame on one guilty individual, which had made it hard to hold large organisations to account for deaths caused by systemic failures. So it targets organisational, systemic failure: how the organisation was run, not solely one person's act. For it to apply, there must be a death caused by how the organisation was managed, a relevant duty of care, a gross breach of that duty, and a substantial element being how senior management ran things. So it holds the organisation criminally responsible for fatal management failures. So it's the offence prosecuting an organisation for causing a death. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
That a death was caused by the way the organisation was managed or organised; that the organisation owed a relevant duty of care; that its conduct was a gross breach (falling far below what's reasonable); and that the way senior management ran things was a substantial element of the failure - so it's about serious, systemic, top-level failure. For corporate manslaughter, several elements must be present. There must be a death. It must be caused by the way the organisation's activities were managed or organised - resulting from how the organisation was run (its systems and management), not merely an isolated act unconnected to that. The organisation must have owed the person a relevant duty of care (such as an employer's duty to its employees, or a duty to others affected by its activities). The breach must be gross - the organisation's conduct must have fallen far below what could reasonably be expected of it in the circumstances, not just any breach but a serious falling-short. And there must be a substantial senior management element - the way the organisation's senior management (those playing significant roles in how the whole or a substantial part of the organisation's activities are managed) organised things must be a substantial element of the breach. So the offence turns on serious, systemic, senior-level failure causing death - not a one-off frontline mistake. So it must be a gross, systemic failure at senior level causing a death. So a death from a gross, senior-management failure of duty. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
No - corporate manslaughter is an offence against the organisation itself, not individuals; but individuals can face separate charges over the same events, such as gross negligence manslaughter and health and safety offences, so a fatal incident can lead to both organisational and individual prosecutions. No - individuals cannot be convicted of corporate manslaughter. The offence is specifically against the organisation itself: a company convicted of corporate manslaughter is the defendant, and the conviction is against the organisation as a body, reflecting that the offence is about collective, organisational failure. So corporate manslaughter is the route to holding the organisation criminally responsible, not individuals. However, that doesn't mean individuals are never held responsible in connection with a workplace death. They can be, but through different routes: individuals can face separate charges such as gross negligence manslaughter (the offence for an individual whose gross negligence causes a death) and health and safety offences, arising from the same events. So a fatal workplace incident can lead to the organisation being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter and individuals being prosecuted separately under other offences. But the corporate manslaughter charge itself falls on the organisation. So no - it's an organisational offence; individuals face other charges. So no; only the organisation, though individuals face separate offences. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
Serious ones: unlimited fines (no cap, scaled to the organisation), remedial orders (requiring the failings to be put right), and publicity orders (requiring the organisation to publicise its conviction, fine and failings) - so financial, corrective and reputational consequences together. The penalties for corporate manslaughter are serious, and combine three types. Unlimited fines: there's no cap, so fines can be very large, scaled to the organisation and the seriousness of the failure - a significant financial penalty. Remedial orders: the court can require the organisation to put right the failings that led to the death (to fix the specific problems), so the penalty is corrective as well as punitive. And publicity orders: the court can require the organisation to publicise the fact of its conviction, the fine imposed, and the failings involved - a reputational penalty that makes the conviction public. So a conviction carries financial (unlimited fine), corrective (remedial order) and reputational (publicity order) consequences together. This combination is deliberately weighty, reflecting the gravity of management failures having caused a death. For an organisation, the prospect of an unlimited fine plus a public, court-ordered admission of fatal failings is a serious matter - a strong reason, beyond protecting life, to manage safety properly. So the penalties are unlimited fines plus remedial and publicity orders. So unlimited fines, remedial orders and publicity orders. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
It makes proper safety management a duty that reaches the top of an organisation - because the offence turns on systemic and senior-management failures, it means safety can't be left as a frontline matter; organisations must manage real risks seriously at every level, control hazards, follow the law and act on known risks. Corporate manslaughter means that managing safety properly is a duty that reaches the top of an organisation. Because the offence turns on systemic failures and the way senior management ran things, it makes clear that safety can't be treated as just a frontline or paperwork matter - the organisation's systems, its management arrangements, and its leadership's decisions about how work is managed all bear on whether it's meeting its duties. Systemic, senior-level failures that cause a death can put the organisation itself in the dock. So it's a powerful reason for organisations to manage safety seriously at every level: to have proper risk assessments and controls; to follow the law (including duties like controlling hazardous substances under COSHH and maintaining safety-critical equipment like LEV); to act on known risks rather than leaving them; and to make safety part of how the organisation is run, from the board down. Good day-to-day safety management - controlling real hazards, maintaining controls, keeping records, acting on risks - is both what protects people and what keeps an organisation clear of this liability. So it makes serious, organisation-wide safety management a top-level duty. So it makes safety a serious duty owned at the top. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
Through the theme of systemic safety failures - the offence turns on how an organisation manages real risks, and safety-critical controls like LEV are part of that; failing to maintain and test controls that protect health is the kind of systemic failing that serious safety management (and this law) is about, so keeping them working matters. Corporate manslaughter connects to specific controls like LEV through its focus on systemic safety failures. The offence turns on how an organisation manages its real risks - its systems, its maintenance of safety-critical measures, and whether it acts on known hazards. Safety-critical controls like LEV (local exhaust ventilation, which protects workers from hazardous dust, fume and mist) are part of that picture: keeping them working, maintained and tested is part of managing the risk properly, while neglecting them - letting a control that protects health fall into disrepair, ignoring that workers are being exposed - is the kind of systemic failing that serious safety management exists to prevent. While corporate manslaughter specifically concerns deaths (and most LEV-related harm is chronic disease rather than sudden death), the broader lesson is the same: an organisation is expected to manage its real risks seriously, which includes maintaining and proving the controls that protect people. So keeping LEV working and tested is part of the serious, systemic safety management the law expects, not a detachable extra. So it's connected through the duty to manage real risks and maintain safety controls. So through the duty to manage risks and maintain safety-critical controls. This is general information, not legal advice. This is general information.
Corporate manslaughter turns on systemic safety failures - so keeping safety-critical controls working matters at every level; we thoroughly examine and test LEV so the exposure controls your organisation relies on are proven and documented, one part of the serious, top-to-bottom safety management the law expects. Ask us to test your LEV. This is general information.
