Areas of Work
Health and Safety
"This set continues to dominate the field of health and safety with its laudable reputation for work in the rail sector. This year members have been involved in high-profile cases involving clients from the utilities sector. The set continues to ensure the breadth of its practice with an increasingly strong reputation in advisory work for companies that want to ensure compliance with health and safety legislation. Members continue to lead the pack, as illustrated by their ability to introduce a novel abuse of process argument in a recent high-profile case." (Chambers and Partners 2005)
"1 Temple Gardens is 'dedicated to health and safety law' and rail safety is a particularly strong area for the set." (Legal 500 2007)
Hugh Carlisle QC, Geoffrey Nice QC, Dominic Grieve, Keith Morton, Dominic Adamson and Mark Bishop are all recommended by the Legal 500 as leaders in the field of health and safety.
1 Temple Gardens is instructed in all aspects of health and safety including:
- Civil Engineering
- Construction
- Corporate Manslaughter
- Costs
- Criminal trials (for Health and Safety breaches and Manslaughter based thereon)
- Expert Evidence
- Highways
- Public Inquiries (BSE, Southall, Ladbroke Grove)
- Public Safety
- Railways (Southall, Ladbroke Grove, Hatfield)
Members of Chambers have appeared in leading health and safety cases including:
Thames Trains v HSE (CA) - an application to strike out an application under CPR 3.4(2) had rightly failed where it could not be determined on the facts available that the HSE could never be held liable to the victims of the Ladbroke Grove train crash for breach of a common law duty of care (Hugh Carlisle QC, Keith Morton, David Barr).
Railtrack v Dr Smallwood (2001) ICR 714 - the Deputy Chief Inspector of the Railways had the power to serve a notice prohibiting activities even though they had ceased following a serious rail accident (Hugh Carlisle QC, David Barr).
R v (1) Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering Ltd (2) Geoconsult GES (1999) CILL 1487 - the objection for prosecuting health and safety offences in the workplace was to achieve a safe environment for those working there and members of the public who may be affected. With a corporate defendant the fine had to be large enough to bring that message home to the managers and shareholders (Hugh Carlisle QC, Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, Keith Morton).
R v Howe (CA) (1999) 2 All ER 249 - in setting a fine for health and safety offences, the court was required to give sufficient weight to the financial circumstances of the offending company amongst the many relevant factors (Hugh Carlisle QC).
Harris v (1) Evans (2) Health & Safety Executive (CA) (1998) 1 WLR 1285 - an inspector acting under a duty under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 could not be liable in negligence for alleged misstatements made about a business which resulted in economic loss (Hugh Carlisle QC).