Ranked in Tier 1 for Business and Regulatory Crime (including Health and Safety) – The Legal 500 (2021)
‘ Provides prompt strategic advice. ’”The consummate professional – calm under pressure with the ability to think quickly on his feet” ” a key name to note” Legal 500 (2021)
“Provides prompt strategic advice ” Legal 500 (2020)
“His practice includes environmental health and food standards matters.” – The Legal 500 2019
“A strong advocate, who acts with intelligence and calm authority”. – The Legal 500 (2017)
“Conscientious and good with clients.” – The Legal 500, (2017)
“He is a safe, and very good, pair of hands.” – The Legal 500 (2015)
“He has excellent people skills” – Legal 500 (2014)
Head of the Regulatory and Public Law Team at PSQB, and an A-List Specialist Regulatory Advocate, Craig appears for the prosecution or defence in a wide range of regulatory cases. His regulatory practice includes serious health and safety cases, often involving fatalities and substantial environmental crime cases. He has significant experience of fire safety and food safety cases, with a particular interest in allergens.
Craig has represented both regulators and professionals in the disciplinary processes of several different professional bodies and sits as a Legally Qualified Chair in Police Misconduct Hearings. He also regularly appears in Coroners’ Courts.
He is well-known for his ability to conduct highly complex cases and is often retained to appear against Queens Counsel. His depth and breadth of experience of cases involving a wide range of prosecuting authorities enables him to bring a unique perspective to cases that transcend more than one area.
Craig works well as part of a team of counsel as both led and leading junior. He has been involved in many large cases with multiple defendants. He regularly deals with sensitive issues of disclosure and public-interest immunity, including covert human intelligence sources, intercept material and offenders with links to terrorism.
Craig’s criminal practice predominantly involves fraud and other serious and organised crime. He has extensive experience in all areas of financial offending including fraud, money laundering, false accounting and insolvency offences. He is experienced in applications for confiscation, compensation and the disqualification of directors. Many of his cases involve corporate defendants and the interpretation of corporate accounts.
Health & Safety: Industrial
- HSE –v- Impact Fork Trucks Ltd – Ongoing prosecution following life-changing injuries suffered by an engineer whose head was crushed between the masts of two forklift trucks.
- HSE –v- H – Retained pre-charge to advise an employee of a waste management company investigated on suspicion of a section 7 HSWA74 offence following a serious de-gloving injury.
- HSE –v- W E Rawson Ltd – Prosecution under section 2 HSWA74 arising from a fatal incident in which an employee was dragged into a packaging machine and crushed.
- Re Richardson – Representation at inquest and in the impending criminal prosecution of a waste management company following a fatal accident at their plant. The deceased walked into the path of a reversing JCB which caused him catastrophic head injuries. Accident reconstruction evidence and alleged failures in traffic management.
- HSE –v- SIG Trading Ltd – Ongoing prosecution of a manufacturing company following partial amputation of an employee’s hand. Employees had deliberately circumvented safety measures introduced to guard the machine (Instructed by HSE LAO) (QC opponent).
- HSE –v- R Plevin and Sons Ltd – Prosecution of a transport company whose employee had suffered a fatal fall from height whilst operating a walking floor trailer. The case involved expert evidence of relevant industry standards and the reasonable practicability or otherwise of safety measures (QC opponent).
- HSE –v- Walter Hesslewood Ltd – Prosecution of a family-run waste management company whose employee was killed when a compressed air cylinder was expelled at very high speed from a waste press. This was one of the first cases to be sentenced following the implementation of the definitive guideline.
- HSE –v- Cumbria Design Scaffolding Ltd & Larkin Engineering Services Ltd – Ongoing prosecution of two companies after an employee of one company was fatally injured when the other company was contracted to lift a large piece of metalwork. Issues of concurrent liability, liability of directors and delay (Instructed by HSE LAO) (QC opponents).
- HSE –v- Suez Recycling and Recovery Tees Valley Ltd – Prosecution of an energy-from-waste facility. An employee suffered significant burns when steam and ash was ejected through the inspection hatch of a furnace (QC opponent).
- HSE –v- Ainscough Crane Hire – Prosecution of a national crane hire company following the collapse of a ladder. The case involved expert metallurgical evidence about the foreseeability of failure due to galvanic corrosion.
Health & Safety: Construction
- HSE –v- Riley James David – Defence of a self-employed builder whose failure to provide adequate edge protection led to a fall from significant height. Non-custodial sentence.
- HSE –v- Balfour Beatty Regional Construction Ltd – Prosecution of a very large company following a fall from height when the floor of a partially constructed floor collapsed. Prosecution had to withdraw unrealistic concessions made at the Magistrates’ Court (Instructed by HSE LAO) (QC opponent).
- HSE –v- East Riding of Yorkshire – defence of a local authority, which itself had health and safety prosecutorial powers, following a fall from height during the repair of local authority housing. The District Judge was persuaded to retain jurisdiction. Consideration of the special treatment of public bodies under the sentencing guideline.
Health & Safety: Agricultural
- HSE –v- Pickett – Representation at inquest and in criminal proceedings of a self-employed farm worker following a fatal accident in which a landowner was killed by a shard of barbed wire expelled from the defendant’s tractor-mounted flail mower. The District Judge was persuaded to retain jurisdiction despite the fatality.
- HSE -v- J REEVES T/A URRA ESTATE. Defence of a landowner following a fatal accident on his sporting estate. An off-road all-terrain vehicle overturned, killing an employee who was collecting birds during a shoot. The Magistrates were persuaded to retain jurisdiction despite the fatality and the very considerable assets of the estate.
- HSE –v- GILBOY Tracey – Section 7 HSWA74 prosecution of a senior care worker at a day centre for disabled adults. The profoundly disabled deceased choked to death on a sweet, given to her by the defendant in breach of the care plan.
- HSE –v- Hillcare Ltd – Prosecution of a care home provider following the death by positional asphyxia of a 76-year-old resident who had been left restrained in her wheelchair for several hours.
- R v Pramanik – Prosecution of a care of the elderly consultant for offences under the Cremation Act 1902
- R v Cheadle – Ongoing prosecution of a Care of the Elderly Consultant, under the Cremation Act 1902 and the Fraud Act 2006 for fraudulent completion of death certification forms.
- Re Nicola Smith – representation of domiciliary care company at inquest into service user’s death. The Coroner made no findings against the company, despite criticisms from other interested persons and excluded the client from the prevention of future deaths report.
- Re Leonard Higgins – representation of domiciliary care company at inquest into service user’s death. Complex neurology and endocrinology evidence. The Coroner was persuaded to reject the findings of the pathologist and made exculpatory remarks in relation to the client, despite strident criticisms made by the deceased’s family.
- Chudary (Speke Care Home Residential) -v- The Care Quality Commission – Instructed to represent the CQC at a three-day appeal before the Health, Education and Social Care Chambers of the First-Tier Tribunal.
- CQC –v- BUPA Care Homes Ltd Instructed by the CQC to advice on the merits of prosecuting a registered provider/manager for a failure to comply with Regulation 12(1) of the Health & Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 resulting in avoidable harm.
- WYTS v LA Ltd – defence of a home improvement company prosecuted under consumer protection regulations, in relation to illegal distance selling techniques.
- NYTS -v- B&M Retail Ltd – prosecution of a multi-billion-pound turnover company for offences under electrical safety regulations. The case arose from the offering for sale of hoverboards which did not comply with EU safety standards.
- R -v- Mohammed Khalique Zaman – Prosecution junior counsel in the first successful prosecution for gross negligence manslaughter arising from a food allergy, and its subsequent successful defence in the Court of Appeal  1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 26
- East Riding Council –v- Dixfield LLP – Ongoing prosecution of food safety offences following a child suffering a significant anaphylactic reaction at a wedding reception.
- York City Council -v- The Indian Garden Ltd – Ongoing prosecution of food safety offences arising out of inadequate allergen controls.
- EA v BH – prosecution of illegal burning of waste which led to the destruction of the defendant’s own business and neighbouring properties.
- EA v WP – successful defence of a director in a prosecution based on the consent, connivance and neglect provisions of the EPA1990. The case was discontinued in the face of an abuse of process application.
- EA v AWSM & Metcalfe – prosecution of a former young farmer of the year for waste management and water pollution offences, leading to significant fish kills.
- EA v PTSD Ltd & G – defence of a demolition company and its sole director for waste offences. The agency was persuaded to drop the case against the director and the company was ordered to pay an insignificant fine.
- South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority -v- Sandhu – prosecution of a hotelier under several articles of the Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order. The defendant was sentenced to immediate imprisonment, leading to unique Court of Appeal authority in relation to sentencing in this type of case:  EWCA Crim 908 (QC opponent).
- SYFRA -v- Monckton Coke & Chemical Co Ltd – prosecution of a waste processing facility following a significant explosion. The case is referred to by commentators as involving one of the twenty most significant fines ever imposed for fire safety breaches.
- West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Authority -v- P, B & H. Ongoing prosecution under the Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order of landlord, caretaker and alarm technician following significant fire at a house in multiple occupation.
- Granary Pub Company Ltd –v- West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Authority – Successful response to appeal against sentence following an incident in which a “smokeless fire” exploded sending a fireball across the ceiling of a public house, setting fire to customers’ clothing.
Craig Hassall is qualified to accept Public Access work, where he can be instructed directly by a member of the public rather than a solicitor.