The item you have requested is not currently available in English and you have been redirected to the next available page. You may use your browser's back button to return to the item you were viewing.
Country desks feature Dentons lawyers in one jurisdiction with a particular focus or experience in another jurisdiction.
Learn more about our Canada capabilities
Learn more about our United States capabilities
Learn more about our Latin America and the Caribbean capabilities
Learn more about our Europe capabilities
Learn more about our United Kingdom capabilities
Learn more about our Central and Eastern Europe capabilities
Learn more about our Russia, CIS and the Caucasus capabilities
Learn more about our Africa capabilities
Learn more about our Middle East capabilities
Learn more about our Central Asia capabilities
Learn more about our China capabilities
Learn more about our ASEAN capabilities
Learn more about our Asia Pacific capabilities
Learn more about our Australia capabilities
At Dentons, we bring together top tier talent found at the intersection of geography, industry knowledge and substantive legal expertise. Start by clicking here
Dentons HPRP wins "Aviation Law Firm of the Year" in the 2018 Indonesia Law Awards
Dentons HPRP wins the “Aviation Law Firm of the Year Award” at the 2018 Indonesia Law Awards in Jakarta, on 4 October 2018.
What’s in a name? When is an “unnamed insured” entitled to insurance proceeds?
Is it possible for a party not named in an insurance policy to be entitled to insurance proceeds under that policy?
Court declines to certify “slack fill” class action
A Missouri federal judge recently denied certification of a proposed “slack fill” class action against the maker of “Mike and Ike” candy.
Changes to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive approved by the European Parliament – what does it mean for the media market?
In October 2018, the European Parliament approved the amendments to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive 2010/13/EU (AVMS Directive) and the Council’s approval is expected imminently.
California breaks new ground in mandating gender diversity on corporate boards
In September 2018, the State of California became the first state in the United States to pass legislation mandating gender diversity in board representation.
Starting your career as a student at Dentons exposes you to a world of experience and opportunities
With 172 locations in 76 countries, Dentons is home to top-tier talent that is found at the intersection of geography, industry knowledge and substantive legal experience. Working with Dentons, you will have the opportunity to learn from the best lawyers in the industry at the largest law firm in the world.
Dentons Rodyk ranked ‘Outstanding’, ‘Highly recommended’ in Asialaw Profiles 2019
Dentons Rodyk is pleased to be ranked in 18 industry sectors and practice areas in Asialaw Profiles 2019.
Mark Withey appointed Partner at Dentons’ Moscow office
Mark Withey has been appointed a partner in Dentons’ Russian Corporate and M&A practice.
Dentons recruits leading Real Estate partner in London
Dentons is pleased to announce that partner Deepa Deb is to join the Firm's Real Estate team in London. Deepa will join from Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (BCLP) where she has been a partner since 2012.
In the past, when a Health and Safety inspector visited a workplace, advice and encouragement would often be given. Where the inspector found obvious disregard for safety, action would be taken, but in many cases the inspector would suggest sources of information and approaches to improve safety. Times however change, and money is tight, and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are expected to support themselves.
In 2012 HSE introduced the Fee For Intervention (FFI). The principle is that organisations which break health and safety laws should pay for inspections.
This principle seems obvious if it was always clear how to comply with the law. The law was not clear in one recent case involving facilities company, OCS Group UK. Their many contracts include mowing the grass around Heathrow airport. The site has small patches of grass, some on inclines, some where equipment has to be lifted over crash barriers to access the location. Accordingly OCS carefully selected mowing equipment with the lowest vibration levels that could be transported, operated safely and still achieves the desired task. They assessed exposure to staff and put control measures in place for example in relation to health surveillance. At other sites, HSE inspectors had agreed the approach met the requirement to reduce risk as low as is reasonably practicable (ALARP).
When a member of staff reported hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) symptoms as part of the ongoing surveillance at OCS, they submitted a RIDDOR report. This prompted a visit from the HSE, followed by a Notice of Contravention (NoC) – and an FFI bill. The HSE argued that ride-on mowers should be used by OCS. The FFI bill presented was not that much for a large organisation such as OCS (less than £2000), but the dilemma was that if OCS paid the bill, they were accepting that their approach to HAVS management would need to be changed. Changes in practice would not be practical from OCS’ perspective and would be very expensive. OCS’ position was that such changes would introduce more risks than it reduced.
The FFI invoice was appealed by OCS. The final stage of the appeal was for two HSE inspectors and an independent person to judge the case. OCS had two problems with this. First, this made the HSE the prosecutor, the judge, the jury and the appeal court. Even if the independent person agreed with OCS, the HSE inspectors could overrule. The second problem was that the HSE were not obliged to let OCS know what evidence they were utilising to found their decision upon.
OCS accordingly lost patience with the HSE appeal process and asked the High Court for a judicial review. A date was set for the judicial review hearing – but a month before the hearing the HSE withdrew the Notice of Contravention and the FFI invoices in relation to OCS, and agreed to review their processes.
A new process is now place. The appeal panel will no longer include HSE personnel. The appeal panel will be chaired by a lawyer from the Attorney General’s panel of lawyers, with two other independent members “with practical experience of health and safety management.” Trade unions and industry bodies are likely to be involved in the panel.
Another success story for OCS is that the HSE will now make available all the evidence that would be placed in front of the appeal panel, and will allow organisations to respond to that evidence before they prepare written submissions explaining why a Notice of Contravention or FFI bill is wrong.
The URL of this tweet is below. Copy it to easily share with friends.
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more