Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 18 October 2006 16:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By MarkS In an HSE accident investigation, is there any limit on how long after the incident an interview under caution can take place ?. If there is, what is it ?.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 18 October 2006 17:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Gwahir Check section 20 of the HSAWA 74
Admin  
#3 Posted : 18 October 2006 18:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Bob Shillabeer Limit of time allowed for an interview under caution? This is new to me I understand the investigator can decide to interview under caution at any time and under PACE must give a caution immediately he considers the interviewee to be under suspicion. Failure to do so makes the evidence given inadmissible in court. So in short No there is no time limit.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 18 October 2006 19:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney I have just supported a previous client who sadly had a major incident, (not on my watch though) This was in effect 2 and a half years ago; subsequent investigations by the EHO and HSE 'specialists'has led to full PACE interviews taking place on certain individuals. Started with basic section 20 powers, some Section 9 Criminal Justice Act and finally PACE in the last two weeks. I also am not aware of a time spent situation, only in certain retrial occasions. CFT
Admin  
#5 Posted : 19 October 2006 07:52:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Adrian Watson There is no time limit on investigating an offense. However, there are time limits on bringing a prosecution. These depend upon the offense and where it is triable - A summary offence can only be tried within 6 months of date of the knowledge of the offense or 3 years of the date of committing the offense, whichever is the earlier. Regards Adrian Watson
Admin  
#6 Posted : 19 October 2006 10:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By MarkS Thank you gentlemen, most helpful.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 19 October 2006 11:27:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis We seem to be mixing a few things up here. First section 9 is about statement admissability in court and I quote: "Section 9 of the Act provides that if the conditions in that section are satisfied, a written statement can be admissible in evidence in the same way as oral evidence. The use of statements under Section 9 of the Act in the magistrates court is governed by Rule 70 of the Magistrates' Courts Rules 1981 Stones Justices Manual 1-6013>. Even where a statement has been served under Section 9 of the Act and all the conditions are satisfied, it remains open to the parties serving the statement to call a witness to give oral evidence. The court may of its own motion, or on application from any party to the proceedings, require the witness to attend. A statement admissible under Section 9 of the Act must be read aloud in court, unless the justices direct that an oral account may be given instead." Interviews are not therefore held under section 9. Section 20 powers do not require a caution and can be conducted at any point by the enforcer. The witness can have someone present if they wish and yes the Law Society have decided that this can be the same law firm as the employer, even the same solicitor as there is not de facto a conflict of interest. There are waivers and other matters to be attended to on the solicitor's part but the HSE cannot refuse on the grounds of de facto conflict of interests. PACE interviews are under caution as the interviewee is under suspicion of a criminal offence. It can be undertaken at any time after the event and has no limitation period. Again representation can be the same as employer, if wished, under the same ground rules. Bob
Admin  
#8 Posted : 19 October 2006 15:37:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By ddraigice The Law society have recently (very recently) changed their guidance to advise solicitors that it is not in their best interest to be present during section 20 interviews if they are representing the company.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 19 October 2006 21:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis ddetc The issue of the newcode of conduct has caused a change to the advice issued earler this year. The advice was drawn up under the previous code of conduct. As I pointed out it is now possible to resolve conflicts of interest in most cases, and there is no de facto conflict Bob
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.