Health and Safety for Beginners Forums

I have a question about Law.

I understand that normally in criminal h&S cases Statue law is used and in civil cases common law is used.

But does common law ever get used in Criminal cases and statue law used in civil cases?

Hi Becky and welcome along. Common Law in Scotland is used extensively in criminal cases such as theft, breach of the peace and assault. Cant speak for England im afraid.
Paul

Common law gets used for some criminal offences in England, murder and manslaughter being good examples. H&S criminal law is covered by statute.There are lots of civil cases which use statute law but if you're talking specifically about H&S, in relation to an injured person you'd be using common law under the tort of negligence.

I think in England & Wales, Common Law can be occasionally used in Criminal cases, but it's not very 'common' to do so aside for traditional crime such as Murder, as cited by Mrs P. The reason some 'Common Law' might be invoked in Criminal Cases is that the definition includes 'ancient' statute law that has been around for perhaps centuries.

But 'Statute Law' wouldn't be used in Civil Cases because the point of Statute Law is to make something a Crime, not a Civil matter.

The definition of Common Law:

Common Law

The ancient law of England based upon societal customs and recognized and enforced by the judgments and decrees of the courts.

The general body of statutes and case law that governed England and the American colonies prior to the American Revolution.

The principles and rules of action, embodied in case law rather than legislative enactments, applicable to the government and protection of persons and property that derive their authority from the community customs and traditions that evolved over the centuries as interpreted by judicial tribunals.

Whilst Statute Law is simply defined as :

A law established by legislative enactment.

Some statute law includes civil sanctions which do not constitute a criminal offence, usually for environmental matters. See the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008, for example.

Mrs P wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:52 pm Some statute law includes civil sanctions which do not constitute a criminal offence, usually for environmental matters. See the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008, for example.

Yeas, that the middle ground as it were, for example where Councils have the Legal Power to impose fines, for littering, excess parking charges, etc which do not result in a Criminal conviction.
Or Regulators such as the Charity Commission imposing fines for the misbehaviour of a Charity.

I suppose there might be some cross over where failure to pay a Civil sanction could result in Criminal Charges, but I can't think of one relevant to H&S, unless failure to pay an HSE FFI charge might result in a criminal case.

And just to muddy the waters further, there is the Occupiers' Liability Act which sets out in statute some of the principles of liability to be applied in common law....

abarnett wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:38 am And just to muddy the waters further, there is the Occupiers' Liability Act which sets out in statute some of the principles of liability to be applied in common law....

Yes, the various Occupiers Liabilities Acts, which do not define or impose any sanction, do clarify some aspects of Common Law in regards to Occupier Liability.
As regards E&W, it was due to changes in thinking that wished to drive previous 'Common Law', which is quite slow to evolve, into a more people friendly direction. In the early part of the 20th Century, it was felt that it was quite hard for a trespasser to be protected, even if that trespasser might be a child out playing.
Case Law defines who or what an 'Occupier' is. The Acts (1957 & 1984) seek to make the Common Law fairer.

So back to the OP, I don't think there is any scope for the 'Common Law' application of these Acts to H&S Cases per se, even though they are Statutes.

Quite interesting this Topic isn't it.