Environmental sentencing
-
Développement en droit 11 juillet 2024 11 juillet 2024
-
Royaume-Uni et Europe
-
Regulatory risk
Environmental sentencing update
| Date | Turnover/size of company (N.B. approx only) | Court | Fine | Sector | Incident type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 April | £22.3 million | Manchester Crown Court | Ordered to pay a total fee of nearly £870,000, including £811,181 in Proceeds of Crime. | Waste |
The defendant waste company and one of its directors were convicted of the illegal export of waste. Additionally, they were convicted of a disregard for proper management protocols. The prosecution came after 10 shipping containers, containing 247 tonnes of refuse, were unlawfully exported to Poland under the guise of the green list process. The illegal export, which was claimed to be clean plastics sorted from household waste, instead contained a majority of plastics which were unsuitable for recycling. |
| 15 April | £45.4 million | N/A | Paid £7,103.45 to Surrey Wildlife Trust for conservation projects. | Retail |
The defendant perfume company failed to register the packaging waste it produced over a four year period and did not pay any fees relating to it. The defendant missed more than £7,000 in payments to the scheme. It agreed to an enforcement undertaking with the EA. The case came under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007 (as amended). |
| 22 May |
U/K Micro company In liquidation |
Teeside Crown Court |
£69,000 £14,666.66 £20,000 |
Waste | The defendant waste operators repeatedly ignored Environment Agency advice that their sites posed a persistent fire-risk before fires broke out that burned for days. |
| 11 June | U/K | Worcester Crown Court | £90,000 | Utilities |
The defendant water company broke conditions of an environmental permit at a sewage treatment works. The permit states the defendant must not discharge effluent containing more than 7 milligrams per litre of biochemical oxygen demand on more than two occasions in a 12 month period. However, the sampling system showed the defendant allowed levels to exceed the permitted levels on three occasions. The defendant pleaded guilty to exceeding permitted levels of sewage effluent into a river. It failed to comply with, or contravened, an environmental permit condition, namely condition 8(a)(i) of environmental permit AH1001901 (as modified from March 31 2015). |
Fin