In any proceedings for an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirement to do something so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, or to use the best practicable means to do something, it shall be for the accused to prove (as the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement, or that there was no better practicable means than was in fact used to satisfy the duty or requirement.What does this mean? In real terms it means that it is not for the prosecution to prove guilt, but for the defence to show that they are not guilty. Ouch! How are you set up to demonstrate that you have reduced the risks "to as low a level as is reasonably practicable"? Need Help? Contact us
Safety consultant with a passion for applying common sense. Offering advice and guidance on many areas of health and safety, including: fire safety; changes in the law; facilities management, asbestos, and many other areas. Helping to keep companies out of court. We also do Food Safety.
Thursday, 14 April 2011
Beware of Section 40
Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 - Section 40 Onus of proving limits of what is practicable, etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment