While catching up with things over the weekend, read some coverage of the prosecution of Anna Ryder Richardson's husband, following an incident that happened at their zoo. In the incident, members of the public were injured by a falling tree. He has now pleaded guilty to breaches of section 2 and 3 of the HASAWA. In this case I can see why they were linked, as employees were exposed to the same risk due to the failings of the H&S management system, (tree management system in this case), and therefore a failure in the duty of care to the employees. The section 3 prosecution is obvious, as members of the public injured, but does a breach of section 3 automatically lead to a breach of section 2 ? If there is a failure in the duty of care to protect non-employees, then surely employees will also have been exposed ?

I agree with Barnaby not always the case that section 2 and 3 are linked. There may not be any employee's for example. Or you may have controls such as ppe for staff but be exposing none employees to the risk.