Transco plc v HM Advocate

Transco plc v Her Majesty's Advocate
Transco plc v Her Majesty's Advocate
	Larkhall, where Transco's gas explosion killed four people
Court	High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal
Decided	3 June 2003
Citation	[2003] ScotHC HCJAC 67, 2004 SLT 41, 2004 SCCR 1, 2004 JC 29
Court membership
Judges sitting	Lord MacLean, Lord Osborne, Lord Hamilton
Keywords
	Mens rea , Corporate criminal liability

Last updated October 14, 2024

Transco plc v Her Majesty's Advocate 2003 HCJAC 67 is a Scots criminal law case that involved the first Scottish prosecution of a public limited company for culpable homicide.^[1]^[2] The decision is considered significant in Scots law on corporate criminal liability.^[2]

Background

Transco was a public gas utility company, part of the National Grid plc. On 22 December 1999, a gas explosion at a family home in Larkhall resulted in deaths of four people, Andrew and Janette Findlay, and their children Stacey and Daryl.^[3]^[4] Transco was responsible for providing a gas connection to the Findlay house.^[5] Police officers in the area had noticed a strong smell of gas, and informed Transco of a possible gas leak. By the time the area was sealed off, an explosion occurred, damaging five houses in the area, including the Findlay bungalow.^[5]

The Health and Safety Executive investigated the explosion,^[6] and subsequently fined Transco £15 million.^[3]^[5]^[7] Transco was also investigated by the Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton for a possible culpable homicide charge in relation to the Findlay deaths.^[3]

Court proceedings

In 2003, the Lord Advocate Colin Boyd charged Transco with culpable homicide and in the alternate, contravening sections 3 and 33(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.^[3] Transco challenged the culpable homicide charge on the grounds of competence and relevance. A single judge refused the challenge and Transco appealed the decision before the High Court of Justiciary, Appeal Court.^[8] Transco maintained that the charge was incompetent and irrelevant: "incompetent" because, under Scots law, a legal person could not be convicted of homicide, and "irrelevant" because, even if the charge was competent and the prosecutor proved their allegations, it would not amount to culpable homicide by Transco.^[9]

A three-judge bench of the Appeal Court was unanimous in their decisions. They held that it was competent for the prosecutor to charge a company with culpable homicide. However, the Court held that the way by which the prosecutor had tried to establish mens rea on the part of Transco was incorrect and that had made the charge irrelevant.^[10] Lord Hamilton and Lord Osborne gave concurring decisions. Lord MacLean did not deliver a decision, but concurred with Lord Hamilton's decision.^[11]

The Court ruled that a company could be prosecuted under Scots criminal law. Both Lord Hamilton and Lord Osborne discussed English criminal law as it stood at the time, especially, the House of Lords decision in Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. v Nattrass .^[12] In Nattrass, Lord Reid had adopted the "directing mind" theory of corporate liability. Lord Reid had famously noted:

A living person has a mind which can have knowledge or intention or be negligent and he has hands to carry out his intentions. A corporation has none of these: it must act through living persons, though not always one or the same person. Then the person who acts is not speaking or acting for the company. He is acting as the company and his mind which directs his acts is the mind of the company. There is no question of the company being vicariously liable. He is not acting as a servant, representative, agent or delegate. He is an embodiment of the company or, one could say, he hears and speaks through the persona of the company, within his appropriate sphere, and his mind is the mind of the company. If it is a guilty mind then that guilt is the guilt of the company.^[13]

Both opinions in Transco concluded that the developments in English law had been incorporated into Scots law. A company could be held guilty, if its "directing mind" was guilty. Transco had argued that the charge was irrelevant, because the prosecution had failed to identify any such "directing mind". The opinions agreed with Transco's relevancy argument.^[14]

Other proceedings

Transco separately appealed the decision to allow the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 charge. That appeal was refused by the Appeal Court.^[15] Transco subsequently made a third appeal, challenging other preliminary decisions made by Lord Carloway as the trial judge. It also challenged Lord Carloway's fitness to preside over the trial on the grounds of apparent bias. The Appeal Court rejected the third appeal as well.^[16]

Subsequent developments

In 2007, the UK Parliament passed the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, which created the offence of "corporate homicide" in Scotland.^[1] Several companies have been prosecuted and convicted under the new law in England (where the offence is called "corporate manslaughter"). As of November 2023, there has not yet been any prosecution for "corporate homicide" in Scotland.^[17] However, there have been calls to prosecute NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde ^[17]^[18] and Scottish Prison Service ^[19] under the Act.

Related Research Articles

The Lord President of the Court of Session and Lord Justice General is the most senior judge in Scotland, the head of the judiciary, and the presiding judge of the College of Justice, the Court of Session, and the High Court of Justiciary. The Lord President holds the title of Lord Justice General of Scotland and the head of the High Court of Justiciary ex officio, as the two offices were combined in 1836. The Lord President has authority over any court established under Scots law, except for the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and the Court of the Lord Lyon.

The High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court in Scotland. The High Court is both a trial court and a court of appeal. As a trial court, the High Court sits on circuit at Parliament House or in the adjacent former Sheriff Court building in the Old Town in Edinburgh, or in dedicated buildings in Glasgow and Aberdeen. The High Court sometimes sits in various smaller towns in Scotland, where it uses the local sheriff court building. As an appeal court, the High Court sits only in Edinburgh. On one occasion the High Court of Justiciary sat outside Scotland, at Zeist in the Netherlands during the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial, as the Scottish Court in the Netherlands. At Zeist the High Court sat both as a trial court, and an appeal court for the initial appeal by Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

Larkhall is a town in South Lanarkshire, Scotland, around 14 miles (23 km) southeast of Glasgow. It is twinned with Seclin in northern France.

A sheriff court is the principal local civil and criminal court in Scotland, with exclusive jurisdiction over all civil cases with a monetary value up to £100,000, and with the jurisdiction to hear any criminal case except treason, murder, and rape, which are in the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court of Justiciary. Though the sheriff courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the High Court over armed robbery, drug trafficking, and sexual offences involving children, the vast majority of these cases are heard by the High Court. Each court serves a sheriff court district within one of the six sheriffdoms of Scotland. Each sheriff court is presided over by a sheriff, who is a legally qualified judge, and part of the judiciary of Scotland.

The courts of Scotland are responsible for administration of justice in Scotland, under statutory, common law and equitable provisions within Scots law. The courts are presided over by the judiciary of Scotland, who are the various judicial office holders responsible for issuing judgments, ensuring fair trials, and deciding on sentencing. The Court of Session is the supreme civil court of Scotland, subject to appeals to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, and the High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court, which is only subject to the authority of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on devolution issues and human rights compatibility issues.

Corporate manslaughter is a criminal offence in English law, being an act of homicide committed by a company or organisation. In general, in English criminal law, a juristic person is in the same position as a natural person, and may be convicted for committing many offences. The Court of Appeal confirmed in one of the cases following the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster that a company can, in principle, commit manslaughter, although all defendants in that case were acquitted.

Jamieson v HM Advocate is a notable legal case which established a precedent in Scotland which held that a man does not commit rape where he honestly, albeit unreasonably, believes his victim is consenting. This was a criminal case decided by the High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal. The appeal case was heard before a panel of three judges with the Lord Justice-General as president, with Lord Allanbridge and Lord Cowie. The case is reported at 1994 SLT 537.

Precognition in Scots law is the practice of precognoscing a witness, that is the taking of a factual statement from witnesses by both prosecution and defence after indictment or claim but before trial. This is often undertaken by trainee lawyers or precognition officers employed by firms; anecdotal evidence suggests many of these are former police officers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Frank Mulholland, Lord Mulholland</span> Scottish judge (born 1959)

Francis Mulholland, Lord Mulholland, is a Scottish judge who has been a Senator of the College of Justice since 2016. He previously served from 2011 to 2016 as Lord Advocate, one of the Great Officers of State of Scotland and the country's chief Law Officer, and as Solicitor General, the junior Law Officer.

The World's End Murders is the colloquial name given to the murder of two girls, Christine Eadie, 17, and Helen Scott, 17, in Edinburgh, in October 1977. The case is so named because both victims were last seen alive leaving The World's End pub in Edinburgh's Old Town. The only person to stand trial accused of the murders, Angus Robertson Sinclair, was acquitted in 2007 in controversial circumstances. Following the amendment of the law of double jeopardy, which would have prevented his retrial, Sinclair was retried in October 2014 and convicted of both murders on 14 November 2014. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 37 years, the longest sentence by a Scottish court, meaning he would have been 106 years old when he was eligible for a potential release on parole. He died at HM Prison Glenochil aged 73 on 11 March 2019. Coincidentally, he died on the same day the BBC's Crimewatch Roadshow programme profiled the murders.

Colin John MacLean Sutherland, Lord Carloway PC FRSE is a Scottish advocate and judge who has served as the Lord President of the Court of Session and Lord Justice General since 2015. He was previously Lord Justice Clerk from 2012 to 2015 and has been a Senator of the College of Justice since 2000. On 4 June 2024 Lord Carloway announced his intention to retire from judicial office in early 2025.

Matthew Gerard Clarke, Lord Clarke, PC was a Senator of the College of Justice, a judge of the Supreme Courts of Scotland, sitting in the High Court of Justiciary and the Inner House of the Court of Session.

Scots criminal law relies far more heavily on common law than in England and Wales. Scottish criminal law includes offences against the person of murder, culpable homicide, rape and assault, offences against property such as theft and malicious mischief, and public order offences including mobbing and breach of the peace. Scottish criminal law can also be found in the statutes of the UK Parliament with some areas of criminal law, such as misuse of drugs and traffic offences appearing identical on both sides of the Border. Scottish criminal law can also be found in the statute books of the Scottish Parliament such as the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 and Prostitution (Scotland) Act 2007 which only apply to Scotland. In fact, the Scots requirement of corroboration in criminal matters changes the practical prosecution of crimes derived from the same enactment. Corroboration is not required in England or in civil cases in Scotland. Scots law is one of the few legal systems that require corroboration.

Moorov v His Majesty's Advocate1930 JC 68 is a Scots criminal and evidence law case that concerns admissibility of similar fact evidence. The High Court of Justiciary established the Moorov doctrine in its judgment, which is predominantly used in criminal prosecutions involving allegations of rape and sexual abuse.

Ross v HM Advocate1991 JC 210 is a leading Scots criminal case that concerns automatism as defence. The High Court of Justiciary clarified the rules for an accused to successfully argue automatism as a defence to a criminal charge.

In 2001, an area of residential land in Bawtry, South Yorkshire, England was found to contain hazardous by-products from the manufacture of coal gas. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, decontamination was held to be the responsibility of National Grid Gas (NGG), even though the negligence may have dated back before the 1948 nationalisation.

Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate (2011) UKSC 24 is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom relating to the effect of non-disclosure of evidence to the defence at trial and the role of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in Scots criminal law.

The judiciary of Scotland are the judicial office holders who sit in the courts of Scotland and make decisions in both civil and criminal cases. Judges make sure that cases and verdicts are within the parameters set by Scots law, and they must hand down appropriate judgments and sentences. Judicial independence is guaranteed in law, with a legal duty on Scottish Ministers, the Lord Advocate and the Members of the Scottish Parliament to uphold judicial independence, and barring them from influencing the judges through any form of special access.

In Scottish law, a Lord Advocate's Reference is a procedure by which the Lord Advocate can refer a point of law that has arisen during the course of solemn proceedings to the High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal, for a determination. The Lord Advocate is the senior law officer of the Scottish Government, chief public prosecutor and head of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in Scotland.

The Scottish Sentencing Council is an advisory non-departmental public body in Scotland that produces sentencing guidelines for use in the High Court of Justiciary, sheriff courts and justice of the peace courts. Judges, sheriffs, and justices of the peace must use the guidelines to inform the sentence they pronounce against a convict, and they must give reasons for not following the guidelines.

References

1 2 Aisha Anwar (17 September 2007). "Killing in company". The Journal. 52 (9). Law Society of Scotland. Archived from the original on 5 April 2023. Retrieved 4 August 2024.
1 2 Chalmers, J. (2004) ‘Corporate Culpable Homicide: Transco plc v H M Advocate’, The Edinburgh law review, 8(2)
1 2 3 4 "Transco charged over gas blast deaths". BBC News Scotland . 5 February 2003. Archived from the original on 25 February 2004. Retrieved 1 August 2024.
↑ Shiels, R. (2004) ‘Common Law Crime: Liability of Non-Natural Person’, Journal of criminal law (Hertford), 68(2), pp. 118–121.
1 2 3 Owen Bowcott (25 August 2005). "Transco fined £15m for gas pipe error that killed family". The Guardian . Archived from the original on 16 January 2022. Retrieved 1 August 2024.
↑ Felicity Lawrence (18 June 2001). "Police investigate Transco records as part of fatal gas blast inquiry". The Guardian . Archived from the original on 10 May 2014. Retrieved 1 August 2024.
↑ "Transco fined £15m for killer gas blast". The Scotsman. Retrieved 16 January 2022.
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2003HCJAC67 , para 29( High Court of Justiciary 3 June 2003).
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2003HCJAC67 , para 31( High Court of Justiciary 3 June 2003).
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2003HCJAC67 , paras 21 and 26( High Court of Justiciary 3 June 2003).
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2003HCJAC67 , para 1( High Court of Justiciary 3 June 2003).
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2003HCJAC67 , paras 19-23 and 47-48( High Court of Justiciary 3 June 2003).
↑ Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass , 1971UKHL1, page 4(House of Lords 31 March 1971).
↑ David Leckie and Aisha Anwar (16 May 2005). "Bad company". The Journal. 50 (5). Law Society of Scotland. Archived from the original on 4 August 2024. Retrieved 4 August 2024.
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2004ScotHC68 ( High Court of Justiciary 16 September 2004).
↑ Transco plc v HM Advocate, 2005HCJAC1 ( High Court of Justiciary 14 January 2005).
1 2 Bruce Craig and Fiona Cameron (17 November 2023). "Scottish NHS board named in rare hospital corporate manslaughter probe". Pinsent Masons . Archived from the original on 4 August 2024. Retrieved 4 August 2024.
↑ "NHS board named in Glasgow hospital corporate homicide probe". BBC News . 12 November 2023. Archived from the original on 12 November 2023. Retrieved 4 August 2024.
↑ Lucy Adams (7 March 2023). "Scottish Prison Service faces prosecution for corporate homicide". BBC News . Archived from the original on 13 July 2023. Retrieved 4 August 2024.