【24h】

Verulam

机译:维拉姆

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Colin Mitchell's quotation (Verulam, February 2016) of Lord Justice Cyril Asquith's 1949 definition of "as far as reasonably practicable" is helpful and, dare I say it, reasonable. However, although Lord Asquith's definition may still hold good in most areas of law, anyone unfortunate enough to be prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act (H&SW) will find that under Clause 40 of this legislation a very different definition applies: "In any proceedings for an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirement to do something so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, or to use the best practicable means to do something, it shall be for the accused to prove (as the case may be) that it was not practicable or not reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement, or that there was no better practicable means than was in fact used to satisfy the duty or requirement."
机译:科林·米切尔(Colin Mitchell)引用西里尔·阿斯奎斯大法官(Cyril Asquith)1949年的定义“在合理可行范围内”是有帮助的,而且我敢说这是合理的。但是,尽管阿斯奎斯勋爵的定义在大多数法律领域仍然适用,但不幸的是,根据《健康与安全工作法》(H&SW)受到起诉的任何人都会发现,根据该立法的第40条,适用的定义非常不同:根据任何相关法律规定对犯罪进行的任何诉讼,包括不遵守在切实可行的范围内或在合理可行的范围内不执行某项任务的义务或要求,或不使用最佳可行的手段来进行某项操作,被告应证明(视情况而定)做比为履行职责或要求而实际做的更多的事是不可行的或不合理地可行的,或者没有比在该情况下更好的可行手段。用来满足职责或要求的事实。”

著录项

  • 来源
    《The Structural Engineer》 |2016年第3期|99-99|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