R v Kuddus [2019] EWCA Crim 837 – GFLR – FSHER – HSWA - gross negligence manslaughter.
- food allergies.
1) gross negligence manslaughter requires proof that, on the information known to D, a reasonably prudent person would have foreseen that D’s breach of duty exposed the deceased to “obvious and serious” risk of death.
2) no requirement for P to prove a serious and obvious risk of death to the specific victim who dies.
3) sole director of company owning a restaurant had duty to ensure appropriate systems in place to avoid risk that customer with declared allergy not served food containing the allergen.
- but, to prove gross negligence manslaughter, reasonable person in D’s position must be shown to have foreseen an obvious and serious risk of death in taking his action (or omission).
- information known by D’s business cannot be attributed to him.
undefined: unpaid