Rank: New forum user 
|
I have been told by an HSE inspector that electing another Client to act as the sole Client only removes any civil liability but not any criminal implications, which I believe to be wrong. Has anyone experience of applying this regulation.
I'm fully aware that the requirement to provide information remains on all Clients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The "other" Clients would still be subject to the wider implications of criminal law, whether H&S, Corporate Manslaughter etc. The limited extent of duty and liability in the context of CDM Regs is, as you say, as stated in Reg 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Thanks Ron, that is understood. However, when the Regulations and ACoP allow (and pretty much advise) to have only one Client for CDM purposes, would there likely be criminal implications on "other" Clients should an incident occur on a construction site?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Difficult to speculate, but the HSE Inspector is correct in principle?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
I agree, it is impossible to remove your obligations under HASAW or Corporate Manaslaughter Act, however, from the ACoP:
This Code has been approved by the Health and Safety Commission, with the consent of the Secretary of State. It gives practical advice on how to comply with the law. If you follow the advice you will be doing enough to comply with the law in respect of those specific matters on which the Code gives advice. You may use alternative methods to those set out in the Code in order to comply with the law.
However, the Code has a special legal status. If you are prosecuted for breach of health and safety law, and it is proved that you did not follow the relevant provisions of the Code, you will need to show that you have complied with the law in some other way or a Court will find you at fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
From your quote Graham:
"....in respect of those specific matters on which the Code gives advice...."
So those other Clients are most likely to be free of 'CDM' fault.In the wider context, and in the context of construction, I have a hypothetical:
Imagine a scenario where there were a number of national statutory providers of a utility or public service who collectively enabled one of them to act as the CDM Client across the Country, and collectively they agreed to a very specific and very lengthy programme of replacement of a network system known to be prone to failure. All very much on the basis of cost and shareholder issues, with safety on the sidelines. One "Client" undertaking the construction side, but all of them collectively involved in the decision on how to go about it?
I hope you get my drift on the collective criminal issues potentially arising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.