R (on the Prosecution of the Environment Agency) v Thames Water Utilities Limited [2015] EWCA (Crim) 960

Mon, 13 Jul 2015

In R (on the Prosecution of the Environment Agency) v Thames Water Utilities Limited [2015] EWCA (Crim) 960, Thames Water appealed against a sentence by way of a fine of £250,000 for an offence contrary to Regulation 38 Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010.  The case was a pollution offence arising from escape of sewage from Thames Water’s pumping station on National Trust land at Chase Brook within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Thames Water operated a pumping station to move sewage through its system.  Both pumps failed and sewage overflowed for a period of time well in excess of the standard period set to respond to such incidents.  Numerous warnings were ignored.

However, the real interest in the case is: (i) it is third very clear indication from the Court of Appeal, and from the Lord Chief Justice in particular, that the tariff for such offences, and similar regulatory offences, has very substantially increased; (ii) in the case of very large organisation, fines may be appropriate in a range not previously seen, such as in excess of £100M; (iii) the sentencing of very large companies should be undertaken by senior Circuit Judges and High Court judges because of the complex issues which they raise; (iv) evidence of a responsible approach and active improvement by the boards of such large companies will provide substantial mitigation.

This case repeats a well known message, namely that financial penalties should be of a level to bring home the message to the board and shareholders of corporate bodies that their duties in respect of the environment must be properly discharged (see F Howe and Son Engineering v HSE [1999] 2 Cr App R (s) 37  per Scott Baker J – “A fine needs to be large enough to bring that message home where the defendant is a company not only to those who manage it but also to its shareholders.”) .  The difference between 1999 and today is that the message is to be measured in millions, not some low tens of thousands.  That is a message which which any large organization might like to consider in now rather than when it has to explain its role in an unfortunate event.

Written by Richard Kimblin for Lexis Nexis.

Related articles

An appellant whose appeal against deportation on human right grounds failed in the Court of Appeal and following the refusal of leave to appeal from the Supreme Court nevertheless succeeded in obtaining leave to remain from the UK Government after making a complaint to the Strasbourg Court....

Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021
Once again, the Home Office has been busy. Having brought in a comprehensive package of regulations, most notably in 2008 and 2012, it now proposes to make further sweeping changes to the way that misconduct and performance procedures are handled....

Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019
Non-Disclosure Agreements in Financial Remedy Proceedings...

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019