Nicholas Cotter in successful defence of care home client in health and safety case
16th January 2018
3PB Barrister Nicholas Cotter has successfully demonstrated before Lincoln Crown Court that his client was not responsible for causing the actual deaths of three residents arising from a breach of Health and Safety (non-employees) in a care home.
The Care Home had on advice admitted security and risk assessment failures linked to its care of the three residents and was fined £70,000.
Related News
-
3PB (3 Paper Buildings) is pleased to announce that Danielle Gotts St. Clair has joined its Property and Regulatory teams and will be based from their Birmingham offices. Danielle has a busy practice in both property and regulatory matters with a strong focus on the cross-over between the two disciplines, from housing (including anti-social behaviour) to police law. She is regularly instructed by local authorities and police services across the Midlands and further afield in...
Continue reading -
3PB (3 Paper Buildings) criminal barrister Berenice Mulvanny, leading fellow 3PB crime and regulatory team member Graham Gilbert, represented the prosecution in the notorious case of Jordan Wilkes, which was heard at Bournemouth Crown Court. Wilkes has now received a sentence of 30 years’ imprisonment, with an extended licence period of 5 years. Wilkes was convicted in a five-day trial in March of attempting to murder a nine-year-old girl with a penknife. He had used...
Continue reading -
The High Court has today found that the Home Secretary breached the public sector equality duty, (‘PSED’) in s.149(1) of the Equality Act 2010, when arranging for single adult male asylum seekers to be accommodated at a remote ex-RAF base in the north Essex village of Wethersfield. The judgment in TG and others v SSHD [2025] EWHC 596 (Admin) follows over a year of litigation prompted by the previous government’s emphasis on the use of...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ specialist criminal law barrister, Holly Fagan, has secured acquittals for her client, accused of harassing two people causing them to fear violence. Holly’s young client, A, heard that the first Complainant (C1) was spreading rumours about him and confronted her in a night club. This did not achieve anything so he tried to speak to her father (C2), who he knew, in the hope that he could help them resolve the situation. The allegations...
Continue reading
