To what extent should a company director be held criminally liable? : drawing focus on the offence of involuntary homicide

Abstract

As is suggested by the title, this term paper will seek to address the personal liability of a company director, devoting it mainly to a particular criminal offence, which is that of involuntary homicide. The idea is to create a crescendo, where the first chapter will assess the crux of a limited liability company, which is the separate legal personality a director enjoys from the company. However, despite the corporate veil’s protection, it is not absolute. This prompts the subsequent chapters, where the author will examine such exceptions focusing on where such protection is abused (intentionally or negligently) by the company director, tying it to article 13 of the Interpretation Act (Chapter 249, Laws of Malta) and the criminal sector. The offence of involuntary homicide, as crystallised in article 225 of the Criminal Code (Chapter 9, Laws of Malta) will be scrutinised, together with works from paramount authors and jurists will be quoted. Consequently, a hypothetical director would be put into the test of the reasonably prudent man, in order to evaluate whether or not he falls guilty of this offence personally. Other parliamentary acts, such as the Health and Safety Authority Act (Chapter 424, Laws of Malta) will be looked at and a comparative study will also be taken into consideration. Following the discussion of all the principles and statutes, the author will then lastly delve into the defences pertained to involuntary homicide. These will be accompanied by Maltese and foreign jurisprudence such as the case of Il-Pulizija v Dr Francis Zammit Dimech, Arthur Gauci, Sylvius Debono et (10 December 2015) in order to answer the question as to what extent a company director would be held criminally liable for the offence of involuntary homicide in a working environment.