HSE fines and enforcement update

50 years of HSE fines and enforcement

The start of 2025 marked the 50th anniversary of the start of something that now seems so ever present that it is hard to imagine a world without it – the Health and Safety Executive (‘HSE’). HSE came into being through the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, a hugely significant consolidation and improvement of existing safety standards.

Changes in HSE fines and prosecutions

There have been many changes since HSE’s creation – new offences such as Corporate Manslaughter, the introduction of the Sentencing Guidelines, shifts in industrial practices – all of which make for a very different landscape from those early years. Fines that used to be measured in hundreds might now stretch to millions. Directors that might once have received nominal fines, face up to 2 years in prison – longer in the case of manslaughter.

This is the first of a series of brief updates looking at current cases going through the courts in recent weeks – these cases were all reported in January 2025 and are at best, a selection, based on the cases that HSE consider to merit publication – the cases referred to in this article are published here.

Company size and fine scales

The first thing that jumps out is that the fines are relatively modest – only two over £100,000 and many much lower down the spectrum. It is notable that all bar perhaps one case reported by HSE in January 2025 involve companies at the smaller end of the scale based on published data on Companies House. This is significant because it has a huge influence on the size of fine imposed.

Fines are now set according to the Sentencing Guidelines Council Definitive Guideline. The Guidelines set out a detailed process for assessment with a variety of adjustments but the most significant factors are the size of the company, the extent of the failing and the severity and likelihood of adverse consequences that might have resulted (and sometimes did). A large company (turnover > £50M) might be fined five times more for a fairly minor breach that risked only minor injury (e.g. Large - ‘harm category 3/medium culpability’ – a range of £130,000 - £750,000) than a ‘micro’ company (<£2M turnover) might be fined for the very worst offence entailing high risk of death or serious injury (Micro – ‘harm category 1/very high culpability’ – a range of £150,000 - £450,000).

What do HSE fines mean in practice

All of January’s fines need to be scaled up to measure the risk to your organisation. A fine for a small or micro company can be read across to the appropriate table where necessary – micro (<£2M), small (<£10M), medium (<£50M) and large (£50M+) (and ‘very large’ – case law permits increases above the upper bounds where appropriate on account of scale for much larger entities).

Some will represent fines discounted for credit – a 1/3 reduction. Again, the risk needs to be scaled up for a worst-case analysis.

So, a £133,000 fine imposed on a micro company, say, might represent a £200,000 fine after trial. That in turn, might represent a finding of ‘high culpability’ and ‘harm category 1’ (high risk of death or serious injury) – the top end of which reaches to £250,000. Read across to the table for large companies, the same range reaches £6,000,000; a fine at a comparable level would be £4,800,000.

This does not explain why this month’s focus has solely been on smaller companies though it is reasonable to assume that these sometimes represent simpler and easier prosecutions, with the lower ratio of safety resource to risks undertaken than much larger companies with devoted specialist teams. HSE though has not been shy in recent years of bringing cases against larger organisations – last year, National Grid were fined £3.2M following a life-changing electrocution incident that occurred in December 2020, with another 8 companies facing fines above £1 million across the year. 

HSE fines - what industries are most affected?

Two of the more serious cases involve falls from height during construction/renovation, one of which resulted in a fatality. Work at height has long been a key HSE focus – understandably given the risks involved.

Three relate to dust exposure – note that these are not cases arising from accidents or necessarily from any adverse effects but from HSE inspections where unsatisfactory processes were uncovered. At least one other case was similarly ‘risk based’ – a prosecution based on what might arise rather than following an accident.

Two cases arose in the waste industry, again an area where recent H&S enforcement activity has been high.

Two cases saw directors prosecuted alongside their companies. One received a modest fine, the other a suspended prison sentence (i.e. a prison sentence that does not take effect immediately but indicates that the offence merited a prison sentence which may be ‘activated’ in case of further offences/breaches). One was also disqualified from acting as a director for 3 years.

Three other cases involved prosecutions following serious injuries requiring extensive treatment and, in two cases, amputation.

Three cases related longer histories of dealings with HSE that spanned significant periods of time.

HSE fines and prosecutions: how long do cases take?

The time between incident/inspection and the case reaching court varies widely – from under 18 months to almost 5 years. The longest running case involved a fatality which always entails longer investigation, often because initial investigations are conducted by police/CPS before the matter is handed to HSE to progress.

This tallies with our recent experience: it is rare to reach any form of conclusion under 18 months, and any matter which requires litigation and trial will inevitably span several years.

What the HSE fines and enforcement update tells us

The picture from January reflects a broad span of enforcement activity across diverse sectors. It is just a snapshot but an indication that HSE can and will enforce wherever it feels standards are not being met, regardless of whether any accident has occurred. Enforcement is not limited to cases where serious injury has occurred.

The relatively modest numbers should not offer false comfort. As noted above, many of these fines would have likely fallen in seven figures had the companies involved been larger.

All the cases serve as reminders of how important it is to take proper care over safety compliance and to obtain prompt advice in the event of HSE contact. It is far, far better to deal with matters properly and promptly than it is to let issues run on and develop.