Rank: Guest
|
Posted By peter gotch
Here's one to remind consultants of their liabilities
For full article check Guardian Online, 3 March
Imperial College of Science fined £20,000 for exposing the public to an "unacceptable risk" from HIV.
Despite warnings that it was unsafe to manufacture the virus for research, work continued in an "unsealable" laboratory.
In the event of spillage, the virus could have escaped
A similar fine was imposed on the college's safety advisers.
The judge accepted that the chances of the virus escaping were not high and said he had had to give careful thought as to how much danger the public had been exposed to
He had then had to weigh that risk "against the public interest" in research being done for the benefit of the public.
Imperial College admitted breaching hazardous substances regulations
Universal Safety Consultants Ltd, pleaded guilty to breaking health and safety law, and was also ordered to pay £12,033 costs.
Peter
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Diane Warne
It would be interesting to know exactly what the "safety consultants" had been engaged to do. The College was prosecuted under COSHH and the consultants were prosecuted under HSWA 3(1). From the HSE press release it looks as though the consultants were somehow responsible for the fumigation with formaldehyde, and that one of the College's maintenance staff was exposed to the formaldehyde.
|
|
|
|
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.