Posted By Paul Norton
Can anyone remind of the legal position regarding the disclosure of accident investigation reports perhaps to claimants or enforcing authorities? How does the recent FIA affect this position. Can someone/anyone request a copy under the FIA? All thought appreciated.

Posted By Paul Norton
Thanks Jonathan. I'm more concerned with the safety professional's follow up investigation report rather than the standard accident report form. Although the investigation report is aimed at preventing similar accidents happening again, if disclosed it can make an organisation more vulnerable to prosecution/civil action if disclosed as a huge amount of evidence is collected internally as part of the investigation process.

Posted By Adrian Watson
See previous threads on this subject; Accident investigation reports are fully disclosable unless produced soley for legal advice.

Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Robert K Lewis
The issue of legal privilege has been widely discussed previously on this forum. All documents are discoverable except those prepared in contemplation of legal proceedings in conjunction with your legal adviser. Ther are protocols that need to be followed, it is not simply a matter of typing "Subject to Legal Privilege" on the front page.

Judges still have the discretion to order disclosure should they determine overriding factors.

The FIA applies to public bodies, but disclosures of personal and confidential information relating to an individual is covered by the Data PA. Thus accident information has to disclosed to the relevant regulatory authority by statute but not to any other company or persons without consent. This actually includes safety representatives as far as I can judge but I would like to know of any case law on this.

Bob

Posted By Adrian Watson
Dear Paul,

You are allowed to know who had the accident! However, you're not allowed access to private information such as address and details of injury.

Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Robert K Lewis
As an afterthought I checked the HSE site info

"Safety representatives are legally entitled to inspect records of accidents that employers have to keep under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR). The Accident Book BI510 is a valuable document that organisations can use to record accident information as part of their management of health and safety.

A tick box is included on each page of the Accident Book asking whether the injured person gives his or her consent to the disclosure of the information contained in that record to safety representatives.

The employer should:

if the injured person has ticked the tick box (and signed the form), disclose the information contained in the accident record, so far as it relates to the injured person, to safety representatives and/or representatives of employee safety;
anonymise the information if the injured person does not tick the tick box and disclose it to safety representatives and/or representatives of employee safety.
The arrangements to pass on this information should be discussed between employers, employees and/or their representatives. The aim should be to make the best possible use of this (and other) information to meet health and safety objectives. By following this approach you and your employer will not be infringing the Data Protection Act (DPA) or confidentiality law."

Which I think was my interpretation in any case.

Bob

Posted By Tony Brunskill
Paul,

As a consultancy we have made arrangements through a specialist H&S Lawyer to undertake accident investigation under legal privilege. There is a need to jump through some legal hoops and it can be necessary to provide for the defense of one or more parties i.e where an action is against more than one accused relating to the same incident.

Regards

Tony

Posted By Robert K Lewis
The quote is a direct copy from the HSE website and so must be seen as the authoritative answer. The HSE are clear - No tick and signature - Then the full record must be anomynised before the rep sees it. This I think also means any detail which could be used as identification. Personal details are defined in the DPA and include sex/ address/ name/ medical information/religion/ sexual orientation among others.

The real problem is for major injuries - the affixing of ticks and signatures by the injured party is going to be a problem!

I am afraid that this is another example of Whitehall drafters not fully understanding the context of their words and also producing imprecision through the simplification of language.

Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis
One presumes the HSE took advice - but that I suppose is one department talking to another. The HSE stated view does make sense though but I think that the practicalities make its operation difficult.

Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Paul N

The purpose of investigating under legal privilege is to have the opportunity to undertake an in depth investigation, review the consequences and make necessary changes in order to provide a sensible defence. The regulator can gather the same evidence and then prove their case in court. From this perspective legal privilege does not cut across the role of the S&H practitioner. One might argue that it frees a company to be more open and honest internally to the problems that exist and face the challenges to resolve the issues.

Bob

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Jackw

Lucky that time. If it is not under legal privilege you must hand it over to the inspector warts and all. Keep the accident report books to fact only. If you are doing a full investigation report then consider the consequences and talk to your legal advisers first.

I had a situation recently where the report and the recognition of exactly what went wrong and why provided the best evidence used by the HSE.

Bob

Posted By John Murgatroyd
If they paid more attention to H&S, and less to trying to hide things under legal priviledge, they may not have to worry about prosectutions !