New public-interest evidence submission · P—47

Where Have All
the Houses Gone?

A request to reconcile Section 106 affordable-housing promises with later lawful changes, delivered homes, replacement provision and public money.

The publication preserves the original promise, refuses to turn a data gap into an accusation, and maps the national and local bodies that must cooperate because no single authority holds the whole evidential chain.

Open the Section 106 investigation →

P—37 · draft research paper · 12 September 2026

When Organisations
Fail.

Corporate Manslaughter and Preventable Death in the United Kingdom

A public legal-education and screening paper about what the law can reach, what evidence it requires and how serious concerns can be examined without turning suspicion into guilt.

Download the main paper ↓

Draft research paper · not legal advice · no finding of guilt

The figures are a minimum drawn from publicly identifiable information located during the investigation so far. They are expected to grow as the research expands, but a death, warning, charge, investigation or inquiry is not itself proof of corporate manslaughter. Every organisation and death must be tested individually against the law.

The central finding

The law is broad across organisations.
The offence remains narrow.

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 can apply across qualifying private and public bodies. It does not convert every harmful event, regulatory breach or organisational connection into homicide.

01
Qualifying organisation
Identify the legal body. A familiar brand, site name or professional title is not automatically the defendant.
02
Relevant duty of care
Establish the duty owed specifically to the person who died and the relationship that created it.
03
Gross breach
Test whether the management or organisation of the activity fell far below what could reasonably be expected.
04
Senior management
Show that senior management’s role was a substantial element of the alleged breach.
05
Causation
Connect the management failure to the death while recording competing explanations and possible intervening acts.
06
Jurisdiction and limits
Check the territorial rules and the Act’s public-function, emergency and other statutory restrictions.

Ten-year surface scan

A starting population.
Not a criminal count.

540recorded direct worker deaths

Construction and manufacturing combined across ten Great Britain reporting years. This is not 540 suspected corporate manslaughters.

364construction deaths

A baseline for screening repeat hazards, warnings, management decisions and delayed enforcement—not an allegation against an industry.

176manufacturing deaths

Fatal-injury data does not capture most deaths from occupational disease, patient deaths or every delayed consequence of exposure.

Thirty named matters · three different statuses

Do not disguise one kind of evidence as another.

Illustrative convictions

Cases in which the corporate offence produced a conviction. They show circumstances in which the statutory route has worked.

Unsuccessful or alternative outcomes

Acquittals, stopped or unpursued charges, and matters resolved through health and safety or other law.

Current matters

Live investigations, proceedings and inquiries whose status must be rechecked. Inclusion is not an allegation or prediction of guilt.

The paper also examines construction, manufacturing, medical and medicines evidence, cumulative exposure, accessible warnings, corporate identity, public-authority restrictions and alternative legal routes. The register is evolving and should be updated when reliable evidence or official outcomes change.

A disciplined investigation method

Preserve the concern.
Test the conclusion.

Authorities need a clear chronology, the strongest supporting material, the weaknesses and the exculpatory evidence—not a conclusion written in advance.

01
Record the death and the source of the information.
02
Separate observed fact, witness account, allegation, expert opinion, official finding and hypothesis.
03
Identify the legal organisation, corporate group, contractor and public authority involved.
04
State the duty owed specifically to the deceased.
05
Describe the alleged management failure rather than relying on the tragic outcome.
06
Map senior-management decisions, authority and actual control.
07
Build a causal timeline and retain competing explanations.
08
Test the alleged breach against law, guidance, practice, warnings and the seriousness of risk.
09
Check exemptions, territorial rules and more appropriate parallel legal routes.
10
Seek independent legal and technical review of incriminating and exculpatory evidence.

Paper and statutory study materials

Read the argument.
Then read the law.

The main Green Tank draft and the two supplied statutory documents are preserved as separate files so readers can distinguish the paper’s analysis from the legal source material.

Main publication · P—37