Lably
Skip to content

Related on Lably

Through United Kingdom, Legal person and Cost–benefit analysis

Safety crime is a sub-category of corporate crime, as the latter refers to all - not just violent - financial crime congruent with the goals of legitimate organisations, like price fixing. Safety crime was termed by Tombs and Whyte in 2007 in their United Kingdom centric analysis of the legal regulation and punishment of workplace health and safety offences. Tombs and Whyte briefly define safety crime as "violations of law by employers that either do, or have the potential to, cause sudden death or injury as a result of work-related activities". These violations include a broad range of civil law and criminal law offences, such as strict liability and manslaughter, and are committed by legal and natural persons. Most safety crimes are strongly associated with rational choice theory by way of cost-benefit analyses.

Safety crime cases

The following examples are cited as high profile archetypal safety crimes in the academic literature. In 1970s North America the Ford Pinto auto-mobile attracted media and government scrutiny after several deadly fires occurred when the fuel-tank ruptured in rear-end collisions. The Ford Motor Company was accused of being aware of the car's unsafe fuel-tank placement and forgoing design changes based on an internal cost-benefit analysis. Consequently, there were multiple successful lawsuits against the Ford Motor Company, most notably the two landmark legal cases Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. and Indiana v. Ford Motor Co.

In October 1999 London, United Kingdom, the Ladbroke Grove rail crash caused 31 deaths and injured over 400 people. The Health and Safety Commission’s inquiry concluded that poor signal sighting led the train driver to erroneously proceed through a stop signal and collide with another train. Concerns had previously been raised with the signal in question because it had caused eight similar instances over six years of train drivers erroneously passing the stop signal due to poor visibility. During this time the train provider, Thames Trains, decided not to install a fail-safe system that would have automatically applied the train brakes if drivers mistakenly ignored the stop signal. This decision arose from a cost-benefit analysis that the costs outweighed the safety benefits.

December 1999 marked a significant moment for corporate liability in Scotland. A gas explosion resulted in the deaths of a family of four, leading to the successful prosecution of Transco, a public gas utility company part of the National Grid plc, in Transco plc v HM Advocate. The Health and Safety Executive investigated the explosion and subsequently prosecuted Transco for culpable homicide, fining the company £15 million.

Sign in to keep reading

3 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Politics and economics