4000 word essay on one of the following questions which you can choose PART A 1 Critically analyse the various alternative principles, rules and models of corporate criminal liability which have been put forward, from both a theoretical perspective and a pragmatic point of view. Explain clearly the differences between them, and the advantages and disadvantage of each. Is having a single theory or rule of liability either feasible or desirable, and, if so, what would your preferred option be? (Your answer need not be restricted to health and safety liability or for deaths at work, but appropriate attention should be given to each of these, in the context of your essay) 2 Discuss the liability (and immunities from liability, and, or enforcement) of the Crown and other public bodies and authorities (such as the NHS, police, emergency services and the armed forces) under (a) the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 and (b) the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Are these liabilities and immunities justified, or should there be fewer exceptions from criminal prosecution for deaths caused as a result of gross negligence and breaches of health and safety legislation? 3 Discuss the importance, and potential interpretation, of the 'senior management' test as used in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. Compare this with other tests for corporate liability particularly the 'identification doctrine' for corporate manslaughter at common law, and also the principles of 'attribution', and 'aggregation' (plus others, if you wish) to be found in other areas of liability. What difficulties and advantages do each of these theories contain for imposing criminal liability on corporate bodies? Should some other test have been adopted in the 2007 Act? 4 Explain the circumstances under which individual persons, at whatever level in an organisation, may be charged with offences (including secondary liability) in relation to health and safety law in general, and deaths at work. Describe the various legal provisions in force and other potential actions and sanctions against directors and others which might be introduced, and whether these would be beneficial or should be treated as irrelevant. PART B 4 Explain the meaning and significance of the phrase "so far as is reasonably practicable' (SFAIRP) as it is used within the relevant statutory provisions of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, including a discussion of the importance of the reversal of the burden of proof, and an explanation of the litigation in the European Court of Justice about the concept in UK law. 5. What are strict liability regulatory offences? Explain their characteristics and how they differ from other types of criminal offence. Explain and discuss the main concepts and principles to be found in the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 with particular reference to sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Act. Give a clear exposition of the differences between these three sections, including an explanation of the relevant case law under each, by way of illustration. 6. Explain the meaning and importance of the concept of 'risk' in relation to offences under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Discuss, giving a clear exposition of the relevant case law including but not limited to R v Chargot [2008] UKHL 73; R v Porter [2008] EWCA Crim 1271. Is it justifiable to create 'endangerment' offences, or do they place too high a burden on employers and those conducting undertakings? (The detailed assessment of risk, under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, need not be discussed). Desired Skills: Legal Transcription, Employment Law, Legal Consulting, Legal Research Keywords: Other - Legal, Consulting, Legal, Transcription, Law, Research, Employment