Asbestos

[keithbilling]

What are the penalties for illegally dumping asbestos?

[Ethel]

Fly tipping is illegal under The Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the maximum fine is �50,000 and/or up to five years in prison.

[Stu Dent]

I have a feeling it'll be a bit more serious than just 'fly-tipping' - even with a 5yr max sentence. Asbestos is a commonly known hazardous material and is commonly known to require specialists to dispose of it safely. Since the harmful effects of asbestos is commonly known, dumping it in a place where it can be reasonably forseen that people could come into contact with it could constitute the required recklessness for manslaughter or corporate homicide. It's not an old mattress or sofa FFS!!

[Ethel]

FFS? Sorry, I don't understand that.

In accordance with the provisions of The Environmental Protection Act 1990 Sections 34, 35 and 59, �fly tipping� (illegally dumping) waste is illegal. If any person is caught illegally disposing of waste, the maximum penalty for Fly Tipping is �20,000. If the case goes to the Crown Court, imprisonment can be up to two years and fines are unlimited (increased sentence of up to five years imprisonment if it's hazardous waste that is illegally dumped).

So 5 year imprisonment for hazardous waste - that includes asbestos - is the maximum offence.

[Ethel]

Forgot the link:

http://www.carmarthenshire.gov.uk/index.asp?lo cID=2870&docID=-1

[Stu Dent]

I have no problem in accepting that there is a five year maximum sentence for 'fly-tipping'. But more serious charges could arise from dumping material that is extremely hazardous. Therefore, depending on the effects of the material in question being dumped, a potential life sentence is being risked by the offender, not to mention a far greater financial penalty in civil damages towards anyone harmed by the waste that has been illegally dumped. The five years/50k will look small compared to a conviction for culpable homicide/manslaughter and compensation, damages, and clean-up costs further down the line.

[seatrout]

I think you are on a flight of fancy Stu Dent if you think you could secure a conviction for manslaughter on the basis of dumping asbestos illegally

[fredpuli47]

Someone who is engaged in doing something which is unlawful and , at the same time, an act which is likely to injure someone and they inadvertently causes the death of someone by that act then they are guilty of manslaughter.

Trouble is, it is extremely difficult to envisage a case where simply dumping asbestos fell within that version of manslaughter.What's envisaged is something like performing an illegal abortion or injecting someone with heroin or, of course,assaulting someone who dies in consequence.Dumping anything, even something toxic,is unlikely to be held sufficently proximate to pursue a case. It would need to be something very extreme indeed, where the death was immediate upon the unlawful action, to be 'runnable' as a prosecution. (The same applies if it were to be run as a case of a manslughter by gross negligence where there is a duty of care, rather than the doing of an unlawful act, causing the death)

[Stu Dent]

Thanks Fred. You put it much better than I did, but that's exactly what I was trying to say. I wasn't looking for a fight by the way but perhaps I'm underestimating peoples awareness of the harm that this stuff can do. I don't because I watched my grandfather slowly die from coming into contact with it. That doesn't make my argument right of course.

My perception was that everyone knows that asbestos is highly dangerous - an entire block of flats had to evacuated just a few days ago in Fife after workmen had an accident removing old water tanks. All the furnishings have now to be destoryed and all the householder clothes - in the entire block, not just that one flat. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_ and_east/7109207.stm

The questions of duty of care, forseeability, and intent, would I think, be the main factors involved. If a court could show that the person or company who dumped the material (whether it's asbestos, dirty syringes, acid, etc), has sufficient knowledge of the potential harm of such material, and that it was reasonable to expect someone to later come into contact with that material then, if that contact with the material was the cause of death, in my view that is sufficient for a charge of culpable homicide/manslaughter to be competent. But yes, the proximity of death from the date when harm was caused to whomever came in to contact with the material may be a problem. I don't think it would have to be immediate though.(thinking about those kids who were charged with manslaughter after a fairly minor assault, and the victim later died after a heart attack).

[Ethel]

I have quoted the relevant law verbatim which includes hazardous waste.

The question never was 'what is the penalty for somebody dying after coming into contact with illegally dumped asbestos'.

[Stu Dent]

You are quite correct, Ethel: The question was not, 'what is the penalty for somebody dying after coming into contact with illegally dumped asbestos'? But nor did it ask 'what is the maximum statutory sentence for illegally dumping asbestos?'.

As with all legal problems, the outcome turns on the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Neither of us can truly answer the question without knowing, as best as we can, the facts and circumstances. You gave your answer, I gave mine. I never at any point said you were wrong, I simply took a more expansive view. But do we really have to bitch about this continually as if we are in some kind of competition to give the best advice?

Depending on the circumstances, we may both be correct. I accept that it will be much more difficult to successfully get a manslaughter conviction, but IF asbestos were to be dumped illegally in the knowledge that the material was a health risk, and that others could come into contact with it, THEN, IF someone died as a result of that deliberate criminal act, a charge of manslaughter or culpable homicide would not be in the least bit excessive or inappropriate. What charge would you pursue if you were the prosecutor. The less risky one or the one that fits the crime?