Under the aggregation doctrine, the criminal components of may be attributed to a company, meaning that it may be held liable for a crime as a collective entity.
’  71 MLR 3 Hansmann, H & R Kraakman, ‘The End of History for Corporate Law’  89 GLJ 439 Harris, P., (Kluer-Nihjoff 1994) Khanna, VS., ‘Corporate Criminal Liability: What Purpose does it Serve?
’  109 HLR 7 Lederman, E., ‘Models for Imposing Corporate Criminal Liability: From Adaptation and Imitation toward Aggregation and the Search for Self-Identity’  4 BCLR 1 Leigh, LH., edn, Hart 2010) Slapper, G., ‘Corporate Homicide and Legal Chaos’  1 Slye, RC., ‘Corporations, Veils, and International Criminal Liability’  33 BJIL 955 Sullivan, GR., ‘The Attribution of Culpability to Limited Companies’  12 CLJ 515 Wells, C., Law Teacher. Sample Undergraduate 2:1 Law Dissertation Proposal.
Assuming that an individual could be located, it would then need to be proven that he/she harboured the requisite components of gross negligence manslaughter – death following a gross breach of duty, which posed a significant risk.
Members of larger companies do not typically implement the decisions that they have made, rendering it notoriously difficult to impose liability. An alternative approach is offered by tort law, which seeks to eliminate the problems that plague the identification doctrine.
Several attempts have been made to impose liability on companies for criminal conduct, although there is disagreement as to whether they have proven to be effective in preventing and punishing such conduct.
It is therefore necessary to outline and critically explore how the law in the UK approaches corporate crime, and whether improvements may be made in the quest to hold companies accountable, particularly from the perspective of whether collective or individual liability is the most effective. History dictates that the conviction of companies for corporate crime does not fit in well with traditional principles of criminal law. It is therefore important to examine why this is the case, and how it may be remedied.Criminal liability was gradually extended so that criminal liability could be imposed upon commercial companies for offences such as nonfeasance. The increased impact that companies have grown to have on society over the years has fuelled the increased willingness to regulate and impose criminal liability on companies for their criminal conduct. As the 19 century came to an end, it had become clear that companies could and should be held liable for statutory crimes, and punished by fines.This brief historical overview demonstrates that two main factors fuelled the imposition of liability upon companies for criminal conduct. Much media attention was given to corporate disasters that had been caused by negligence, and which had resulted in many deaths. The second factor was that employment-related fatalities were unsuccessfully tried, revealing the inability to hold companies liable under traditional criminal law principles. It is therefore necessary to examine how companies may be held liable for criminal conduct, whether collective individual responsibility should be imposed, and how the law may be reformed to hold companies liable for criminal conduct.This book takes you through all the elements needed for a successful dissertation proposal and dissertation.The book explains the sections required for both proposal and dissertation, and offers helpful downloadable templates to assist with the presentation.Such an issue has lingered, as it even now appears confusing to some that a corporate entity may be convicted and punished as a criminal.The common approach during the 16 centuries was that a company ‘is not indictable, but the particular members of it are’. Early attempts to hold companies liable were plagued by a variety of practical and theoretical hindrances – it simply could not be accepted that companies could harbour the necessary culpability and moral blameworthiness necessary to prove From a practical perspective, the problem is that companies cannot physically appear in court, and attributing criminal conduct to companies meant that it was notoriously difficult for them to be held liable. It was not until the 19 century that the approach towards corporate criminal liability shifted, and thus emerged a general consensus that something should be done so that companies could be held criminally liable. The UK courts began to display increased willingness to impose liability on quasi-public companies for offences such as public nuisance.The current law, and cases pertaining to it, will be critically explored, in order to determine how criminal liability is imposed, and the components underlining it.The law will then be critically analysed, drawing upon various viewpoints set forth in existing literature and textbooks. Sample Undergraduate 2:1 Law Dissertation Proposal [Internet]. [Accessed 6 September 2019]; Available from: https:// As your dissertation is a larger piece of writing you should have a title page.Your School should provide you with a standard Solent University dissertation cover.