An analysis of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act (2007): A Badly Flawed Reform?

Abstract

A conviction of a large corporation for manslaughter was in practice impossible. This statement was accurate when the prosecution utilised the identification/ “directing mind and will” doctrine. The position in relation to prosecutions against small companies was somewhat different. It was relatively straight-forward to successfully prosecute a “one-man band” style company due to its simple corporate structure. The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act (2007) was enacted to resolve this issue. This thesis will endeavour to consider the lengthy process of law reform that ultimately resulted in the enactment of the legislation.
It was the desire of Parliament that this Act would eliminate the difficulties that were faced by the courts when dealing with large complex corporate structures. This thesis will consider whether Parliament’s desire has been achieved or whether the same problems associated with the old doctrine still exist.
This thesis will argue that the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act (2007) has simply provided a gloss upon the identification doctrine and that we now have an “identification-plus” doctrine in the form of the “senior management test”. It is therefore questionable whether the new test would be any more effective when tested against a large corporate structure, than the old doctrine.
In addition, this thesis will consider the Canadian model and whether any lessons can be learned from their approach to corporate criminal liability.