Key Facts
- •Exolum Pipeline Systems Ltd. convicted of two offences under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 for failing to ensure the safety of employees and non-employees during pipeline excavation.
- •The incident involved excavating a potentially leaking pipeline clamp carrying petroleum under high pressure.
- •A conscious decision was made not to depressurize the pipeline or change the product before excavation.
- •Excavation proceeded despite concerns about a leak, ultimately revealing a leaking clamp.
- •No one was injured, but the potential for a serious incident existed.
- •Original sentence: £2,300,000 fine (£1,000,000 and £1,300,000 consecutively), plus victim surcharge and prosecution costs.
Legal Principles
The term 'risk' in the 1974 Act has its ordinary meaning – the possibility of danger, not actual danger.
R v Board of Trustees of the Science Museum [1993] 3 All ER 853
The prosecution doesn't need to prove a particular leak mechanism would have caused injury.
R v Chargot Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1 at [22] to [26]
Legislation concerns situations with a material risk to health and safety that any reasonable person would appreciate and guard against.
R v Chargot Ltd (per Lord Hope)
The Galbraith test (1981) was applied to determine if there was sufficient evidence for a conviction.
R v Galbraith [1981] 1 WLR 1039
Outcomes
Appeal against conviction refused.
Sufficient evidence existed to show a material risk to health and safety, despite the eventual leak being small. The possibility of a larger, more dangerous leak was present.
Appeal against sentence allowed; fine reduced.
The original fine of £2,300,000 was considered manifestly excessive. The court adjusted the fine upwards for multiple workers at risk, and then downwards to reflect mitigating factors. The reduced total fine is £1,500,000 (£600,000 and £900,000 consecutively).