Page 1

All England Reporter/2011/May/*R v Cotswold Geotechnical (Holdings) Ltd - [2011] All ER (D) 100 (May)
[2011] All ER (D) 100 (May)

*R v Cotswold Geotechnical (Holdings) Ltd

[2011] EWCA Crim 1337
Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Lord Judge CJ, Beatson and Bean JJ (judgment delivered extempore)
11 May 2011
Sentence - Imprisonment - Length of sentence - Defendant company being convicted of corporate
manslaughter - Judge imposing fine of 385,000 - Fine having potential to force defendant into liquidation Whether judge erring - Whether fine manifestly excessive - Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide
Act 2007, s 1(1).
Abstract
Sentence - Imprisonment. The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, dismissed the defendant company's
appeal against sentence on the basis that the judge had not erred in determining the fine imposed and the
fact that the company would be put into liquidation would be an unfortunate but unavoidable consequence.
Digest
The judgment is available at: [2011] EWCA Crim 1337
In January 2006, the deceased, W, started working for the defendant company. The company was a small
'one man band'. E was the sole director, and sole effective controller of its activities. W's position was junior
geotechnical engineer and he worked directly under E. The nature of their work was such that they had to
investigate soil conditions below ground. In order to do so it was the practice of E (and the company) to dig
trial pits. It was not uncommon for E or W to enter trial pits which had not been supported, including pits
deeper than 1.2 metres. On the company's case that was only ever done when it was safe to do so and at
least one other person was in close proximity on the surface. On 5 September 2008, seven trial pits were
dug in the course of the day. W entered a trial pit without anyone else in close proximity. That trial pit was 3.5
metres deep. Tragically, it collapsed on him. The company was convicted of corporate manslaughter
contrary to s 1(1) of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. On 17 February 2011,
the company was sentenced to a fine of 385,000 payable over 10 years at a rate of 38,500 per annum.
The fine was wholly beyond the means of the company. The company appealed against sentence.
It contended that the fine imposed was manifestly excessive. The judge imposed a fine which was 250% of
its turnover of 154,000 and was therefore so substantial and out of all proportion to its means that it could
not possibly be paid and would inevitably force it into liquidation.
The appeal would be dismissed.
In the circumstances, it was plainly forseeable that the way the company conducted operations could cause

Page 2

serious injury or death. The reality was that the judge had taken the view, and had been right to take the
view, that, in the circumstances the fact that the company could be put into liquidation was unfortunate but
unavoidable and inevitable. There could be no justifiable criticism of the sentence imposed. The company
was faced with manslaughter causing death as a result of a gross breach of duty following a system of work
that was unsafe with the potential for causing death.
Richard Lissack QC and Keith Morton QC for the defendant.
Mark Ellison QC and Adrian Darbishire (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.

Benjamin Weaver Barrister.