R v Scottish and Southern Energy plc [2012] EWCA Crim 539 – Regs 2, 5 and 9 CPUTR.
1) more than one person may be prosecuted as a “trader” for the same CPUTR offence.
- a non-trading company may be a “trader” and have a “business” within the meaning of the CPUTR.
2) the fact that a trading company employed and trained the relevant staff did not preclude the parent holding company from being a “trader”.
- a trading company could act on its own behalf and also on behalf of its parent company.
- the definition of “trader” is wide and elastic.
- the definition of “commercial practice” is broad and can cover involvement in, or supervision or control of, training.
3) a purposive approach is required to the interpretation of the CPUTR.
undefined: unpaid