Contravention of The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015
the instrument as a whole of The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015
- Status not determined
- Strict liability
- Set by another provision
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheries
This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.
What the provision says
Contravening this instrument is an offence under section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.
Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.
Who it binds, and what has to be proved
- Binds
- a person
- Conduct
- breaching the provision
- Fault element
- Strict liability
- Burden of proof
- Not determined
The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a person meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.
Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.
Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.
What would breach the instrument as a whole?
These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.
- Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
- Maximum fine
- Not determined
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.
No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.
Sentencing
Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Environmental offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2014
Covers unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste, illegal discharges to air, land and water, and the equivalent offences committed by organisations. It is the guideline that introduced turnover bands for corporate fines, so the size of the defendant company is a starting point rather than a mitigating detail.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
-
General guideline: overarching principles
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
-
Totality: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.
Prosecution figures
No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.
Status and lifecycle
- Current status
- Status not determined
- Made
- 22 January 2015
- In force from
- 6 April 2015
- Extent
- Not stated
How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.
What the instrument is for
(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
These Regulations revoke and re-enact, with modifications, the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (S.I. 2007/320) (the “2007 Regulations”). They implement in Great Britain the requirements of Directive 92/57/EEC (OJ No L245, 26.8.92, p6) (“the Directive”) on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites (eighth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), except certain technical requirements in the annexes to the Directive which are implemented by other health and safety regulations relating to specific hazards or circumstances. These include the Work at Height Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/735) and the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 (S.I. 1992/3004). Part 2 sets out the client duties under the Regulations. Part 3 provides for various health and safety duties and roles, namely general duties, the duties of the principal designer, principal contractor, designers and contractors. Part 4 provides the general requirements for all construction sites which remain largely unchanged from the 2007 Regulations. Part 5 sets out general provisions including the requirement for a review of the Regulations by the Secretary of State. The main changes from the 2007 Regulations are— These Regulations apply to all clients of construction projects, whether or not a person is acting in the course or furtherance of a business (regulation 2(1)). Pre-construction archaeological investigations are not included within the scope of the definition of construction work (regulation 2(1)). The role of CDM co-ordinator has been removed and various duties have been recast including client duties (regulation 4) and general duties (regulation 8). A client is required to appoint a principal designer as well as a principal contractor in any project where there is, or it is reasonably foreseeable that there will be, more than one contractor working on the project (regulation 5). Under the 2007 Regulations appointments for similar roles were required for notifiable projects. The duty to notify now lies with a client and the threshold for notification is raised (regulation 6). If a client is a domestic client, most of their duties will be carried out by the contractor, principal contractor, or principal designer (regulation 7). The duties of the principal designer are set out in regulations 11 and 12. Modified duties of the principal contractor are set out in regulation 12 to 14. Modified duties of contractors are set out in regulation 15. Transitional provisions are set out in Schedule 4. The Secretary of State will carry out a review of the Regulations under the provisions of regulation 39. The key changed role in these Regulations from the 2007 Regulations is that of the principal designer. This role fulfils the function of a safety and health coordinator for the project preparation stage as required by article 3.1 of the Directive which was previously carried out by the role of CDM co-ordinator. The principal designer has a more central role in the project than that of a CDM co-ordinator as they must be a designer with control over the pre-construction phase of the project (regulation 5(1)(a)). The pre-construction phase includes all design and preparation work for the construction project (regulation 2(1)). The principal designer is required to coordinate all health and safety matters relating to the pre-construction phase alongside the overall planning, management and monitoring of the pre-construction phase of the project (regulation 11(1)). Schedule 4 provides transitional provisions for existing projects. Where an existing project has a CDM co-ordinator, a principal designer must be appointed within six months of the date these Regulations come into force unless the project ends before that date (paragraph 4 of Schedule 4). During the interim period the existing CDM co-ordinator must fulfil the duties in paragraph 5 of Schedule 4. The principal contractor role fulfils the role of safety and health coordinator for the project execution stage as required by article 3.1 of the Directive. The core duties of the principal contractor have only minor modifications from those imposed under the 2007 Regulations and a principal contractor who has been appointed to an existing project under the 2007 Regulations will be treated as if they had been appointed as a principal contractor under these Regulations (paragraph 8 of Schedule 4). A full impact assessment of the effect that these Regulations will have on the costs of business has been prepared. A copy of this document and the transposition note in relation to the implementation of the Directive have been placed in the Library of each House of Parliament and are annexed to the Explanatory Memorandum which is available alongside these Regulations at www.legislation.gov.uk.
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
What Parliament said
Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.
-
Workplace Deaths: Scotland
Commons · 24 July 2019 · Justin Tomlinson
We are already world-leading, and the new Prime Minister will continue everything that is great about this country. I am sure that he will take particular interest in how we are recognised for our achievement in the area, and rightly so. The HSE has commissioned research to gain a better understanding of farmers’ attitudes to risk and risk-taking behaviour. From that research, a programme of interventions has been…
-
Building Safety Bill (First sitting)
Commons · 9 September 2021 · Ruth Cadbury
Q Thank you. This question is for both witnesses. Do you feel that the Building Safety Bill will significantly improve the building safety regime in this country, and make residents of existing and future residential and other buildings feel safe? Graham Watts: The Bill is very welcome. It is a step forward from the draft Bill that we saw last year. The clarification on scope has been very welcome, for example, but…
-
Offshore Wind Farms: Health and Safety
Commons · 6 March 2023 · The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mims Davies)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for East Lothian (Kenny MacAskill) for bringing this important debate to the House, and I appreciate and understand the passion and conviction he brings to this debate. The UK Government take very seriously health and safety on offshore wind farms in Great Britain’s territorial sea and the UK continental shelf, and I am keen to reassure the hon. Gentleman that my officials at the…
-
Quarries: Planning Policy
Commons · 16 December 2025 · Alberto Costa
I absolutely agree, and I sympathise entirely with the hon. Lady. I would go further. I made the point earlier about finding suitable experts who are able to apply their technical expertise to help campaign groups or MPs to rebut planning applications on a technical basis. They are simply not there, for fear of a conflict of interest given their commercial interests with large-scale developers. The hon. Lady makes…
How this was identified as an offence
Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.70.
- Basis
- the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
- Confidence
- 0.70 of 1.00
A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.
Check the source
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheriesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2015