Hefty Health and Safety at Work fines following attacks on staff


22nd August 2023

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) fines have been issued to two companies under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 after hospital staff were subjected to violent attacks.

Background

In Parkcare Homes (No.2) Ltd and Priory Central Services Ltd [2023] MHLO 2 (HSE), two companies were jointly responsible for operating the mental health unit at the Priory Hospital near Aberdare; Parkcare Homes (No.2) Limited (“Parkcare”) and Priory Central Services Limited (“Priory”). The facility provided care services for up to 12 people with learning disabilities as well as mental health and behavioral issues. Parkcare owned and operated the unit. Priory primarily was responsible for the provision of staff training, the management of equipment, and staff recruitment.

Between 2014 and 2017, a range of safety concerns arose. The incidents that were reported included serious violence towards both care staff and patients, resulting in injuries. At least one member of staff required skin grafts after being subjected to a prolonged bite from a patient. Staff were also reported to have suffered loss of consciousness and permanent scarring following interactions with patients.

Concerns were first raised by Priory in 2016, but Priory’s management failed to take prompt and appropriate action to address the issues. The unit was closed in 2017.

An HSE investigation determined that there were no suitable risk assessments and safety equipment was defective and/or not fit for purpose. Staff were provided with alarms that failed to work at critical moments and safety jackets that were inappropriate for the work environment as they were not bite resistant. The HSE also identified that staff were not given suitable training to manage the type of patients that resided within the facility, the risk assessments and care plans were inadequate and there was a lack of supervision. The HSE therefore brought a prosecution.

The Law

Sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 places a general duty on employers to ensure the health, safety and welfare of employees and persons other than their employees whilst at work. Under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, employers also have a duty to maintain a work environment that is reasonably safe and devoid of health risks. This includes adequate facilities and arrangements for employee welfare.

Parkcare was prosecuted under Sections 2(1) & 3(1), indicating failures in securing both employees’ safety and the safety of care users.

Priory was pursued under Section 3(1), underscoring concerning the appropriateness of training, equipment, and overarching employment practices.

Sentence and comment

Those operating in the care sector will therefore need to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that their employees are in a safe work environment where the risks have been reduced to the lowest level possible, or face the prospect of criminal prosecution. Care providers should have adequate arrangements to prevent violence towards staff and other patients.

The Court has the power to impose an unlimited fine where a Defendant is found guilty of an offence under the Health and Safety at Work Act. The Court considers a variety of factors when administering fines in cases of this nature. These factors can include but are not limited to:

  • The level of physical or mental injury caused
  • The turnover of the business
  • The degree to which the Court feels that the business fell short of industrial standards
  • Whether efforts were made to address risks appropriately when they were identified
  • Whether any breach was deliberate

In this particular case, a sentencing hearing was held at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court on 26 July 2023 following a hearing on 30 November 2022 where both parties had entered guilty pleas:

  • Parkcare was fined £363,000 and ordered to pay £43,656 in costs.
  • Priory was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £43,656 in costs.

The differing fines reflect the fact that Parkcare directly controlled staff and daily activities and was, or should have been, aware of the issues at an early stage, whilst Priory was not involved in day to day management and was deemed only to have been in breach of duty from November 2016.

At Blake Morgan, our expert regulatory solicitors and barristers have extensive experience in advising regulators. Contact us if you require legal advice or representation.

If you would like advice on anything from this article

Speak to a member of our regulatory law team

Arrange a call

Enjoy That? You Might Like These:


articles

20 March -
The Anaesthesia Associates and Physician Associates Order 2024 (AAPAO) was made on 13 March 2024. The AAPAO is significant for two reasons: It brings anaesthesia associates and physician associates into... Read More

articles

19 March -
How do you grow a business? Not an easy question to answer as there are so many elements for start-ups to consider, but taking on board advice from those that... Read More

case-studies

21 February -
In an appeal against a Fitness to Practise panel decision, the High Court considered the issue of the correct basis for a case being remitted for re-hearing. This proved to... Read More