Thanks, very interesting for those us interested in the breach of statutory duty area! I agree with the comment at the linked blog, strict liability in this area has been around for well over a century, and this is a bad decision. What will be interesting will be to see how they do it. Liability under the HSW Regs & associated regs is only strict for civil actions because that is the way that the criminal provisions are worded. Presumably they could take one of two broad approaches- (1) treat civil BSD liability separately to the criminal obligations, and somehow provide that a civil BSD action will be subject to a defence of "reasonable care" or the like; or (2) redefine the standard required under a whole raft of criminal provisions. Of the two bad options I think (1) would be the least bad, because at least that would not water down the standard of care required of employers etc under the criminal law. But I suspect they will tend towards option (2) and water down safety requirements across the board. That is going to require some interesting drafting.

Regards

Neil