【24h】

Legal news

机译:法律新闻

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The Court of Appeal ruled early in 2010 on when a party is deemed to be an operator under the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 (COMAH), in a judgement in connection with the Buncefield explosion. HOSL, the Buncefield site's operating company, was a joint venture between Total and Chevron and was charged with a breach of regulation 4 of COMAH for failing to take all measures necessary to prevent major accident hazards and to limit their consequences. However, HOSL argued that it was not the operator of the site for the purposes of COMAH, and that its prosecution should not therefore continue. Evidence showed that Total was in fact in control of the operations on a day-to-day basis and had, at an early stage, identified itself to the Health & Safety Executive and the Environment Agency (the competent authorities for COMAH) as being the operator of the site.
机译:上诉法院于2010年初作出裁决,在与Buncefield爆炸案有关的判决中,当事方被视为《 1999年重大事故危险控制条例》(COMAH)的经营者。邦斯菲尔德工厂的运营公司HOSL是道达尔与雪佛龙(Chevron)的合资企业,因未采取一切必要措施防止重大事故隐患和限制后果而被控违反COMAH第4条。但是,HOSL辩称,出于COMAH的目的,它不是该站点的运营商,因此不应继续对其进行起诉。有证据表明,道达尔实际上在日常运营中处于控制之中,并且在早期阶段就向健康与安全执行官和环境局(COMAH的主管部门)表明了自己的职责。网站的运营商。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Wastes Management》 |2011年第1期|p.8|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号