Despite his claim for unfair dismissal because of his religious beliefs being dismissed after a nine-day hearing at a Birmingham Employment Tribunal, Dr David Drew said:

“I actually found the tribunal very enjoyable. It was a cathartic experience because I was able to talk about what had happened and I was well supported by my witnesses.”

The 64-year-old former clinical director was dismissed for “gross misconduct and insubordination” from his position at Walsall Manor Hospital in Birmingham three days before Christmas in 2010.

An independent review had previously concluded that his use of religious language was inappropriate in a professional setting.

The father of four from Sutton Coldfield had sent emails to his colleagues in which he quoted from poems and the Bible.

Although told such communication was unacceptable and that he should keep his religious beliefs to himself, Dr Drew ignored the review’s recommendation.

The employment tribunal heard there were occasions that Dr Drew had used the phrase “I am a Christian, therefore…” while at work.

Employment Judge David Kearsley commented:

“There is no need for such assertions in professional communication nor was there a need to make religious references if they are considered inappropriate and if they hinder proper communication.”

The judge went on to say that complaints were made about Muslim or Hindu doctors quoting from holy texts, they too would be asked to refrain from such behaviour.

Similarly, if an atheist consultant caused unease by trying to educate his colleagues about “the works of Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens”, he or she would be treated in the same way, the judge added.

The tribunal decided the disciplinary panel at the hospital had been entitled to rule that Dr Drew’s behaviour was “gross misconduct”, and its decisions had not been influenced, even at a subconscious level, by Dr Drew having religious beliefs.

However Dr Drew, a Baptist churchgoer, argued the judgement would have major implications for any workplace:

“This means that you cannot be yourself in the workplace, you cannot say ‘I am a Christian’,” he said.

“Other people who have got other religions won’t be allowed to either.

“For example we would be in meetings when one or two of my colleagues who are Muslims would go across into a corner to pray.

“The Muslim doctors have been more supportive of me than any other groups and I have a very warm working relationship with them.”

Dr Drew, who brought his case independently, is now considering whether to appeal.

The supreme court has ruled that employers can continue to set the age at which their staff retire, but only if they can prove a strong justification for doing so.

The court unanimously dismissed an appeal by a solicitor who was told to retire by Kent law firm Clarkson Wright and Jakes just after his 65th birthday, in line with his partnership agreement.

The case turned on whether age discrimination inherent in mandatory retirement policies can be justified under the law as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate business aim.

Solicitor Leslie Seldon, a partner in the firm, had wanted to continue working, but his request was turned down. He appealed the decision, arguing age discrimination.

The firm disagreed, claiming its mandatory retirement age gave associates an opportunity of partnership within a reasonable timeframe and therefore an incentive to stay.

It also enabled the firm to plan recruitment and promotion by knowing when vacancies would occur and to limit the need to expel underperforming partners, contributing to a congenial and supportive culture within the firm.

In reaching its ruling, the court concluded employers needed to give particular consideration to whether a “public interest” was served when telling anyone to retire, declaring:

“All businesses will now have to give careful consideration to what, if any, mandatory retirement rules can be justified in their particular business.”

Having done so, “it has still to be asked whether it is legitimate in the particular circumstances of the employment concerned”.

However, despite unanimously rejecting Seldon’s appeal, the supreme court referred the case back to the Employment Tribunal to consider whether the choice of a retirement age at 65 was justified.

After the ruling a spokesman for the Department for Business said:

“This decision confirms that businesses can justify a compulsory retirement age based on legitimate aims such as workforce planning, provided that this is proportionate.

“While we do not expect this decision to fundamentally change the retirement policies of most businesses, we believe that this decision will give greater certainty to those businesses that have chosen to apply a retirement age.

“Legislation has always allowed a business to impose a set retirement age, so long as it could be objectively justified. This was the case while the default retirement age was in operation and remained the same following its abolition.

“This decision has given some guidance as to when this may be acceptable.”

Security guard Keith Smith was on duty at a factory in Stafford when a member of the public arrived to complain about the noise.

But when Mr Smith, a security supervisor with an impeccable five year plus record, allowed the man access to help him “sort it out” his employers, Status UK Limited, who trade as Vellen Guarding of Wilnecote Hall, dismissed him.

“Mr Smith breached health and safety regulations by allowing an unauthorised member of the public onto the site,” Fred Wilkinson, representing the firm, told an employment tribunal in Birmingham.

The member of the public could have been involved in an accident while on the site, with no insurance cover, he said, adding that Mr Smith was also allegedly involved in a dispute with cleaners on the site.

After being accused of unprofessional conduct, Mr Smith was suspended and eventually dismissed.

In response Mr Smith argued he should not have been punished with dismissal, and claimed he had been intimidated by one of his bosses, who was a martial arts black belt holder.

Tribunal judge Leslie Antis concluded Mr Smith had been unfairly dismissed and that he should receive a bonus of £210 to which he was entitled. However he warned Mr Smith that the compensation award might not be substantial.

The judge suggested the respondents and Mr Smith could attempt to reach an agreement over the compensation settlement in the hope of avoiding a further tribunal hearing.

For almost two decades Philip Hambly worked for Corby food manufacturer Solway Foods Limited.

Then, in March last year, despite suffering from epilepsy and being told such work could make him ill, he was given a new job on the production line sorting pallets.

Were he to do it, he told his employers, he would be putting his co-workers and himself at risk.

But despatch manager John Adkins and occupational health advisor Seymour Franklin disagreed. Mr Franklin undertook a risk assessment and concluded the job was safe.

However, when Mr Hambly suffered a fall while doing the work, he felt he had no option but to resign.

“I could not understand why I was put to work on a line when, for over 10 years, it was made very clear by the management and occupational health advisor that I must not,” said Mr Hambly.

“It was completely unsafe to have me working on the line.”

Consequently, with help and support from the Northamptonshire Rights and Equality Council, Mr Hambly took his claim of constructive dismissal and disability discrimination against the company to an employment tribunal.

There he explained his decision to resign was influenced by a desire to look after his seven-year-old son Thomas, and his concern that an injury at work could affect his ability to care for him.

The tribunal has now found in his favour and Mr Hambly will be awarded damages.

After the hearing Jenny Sebastian from the Rights and Equality Council commented:

“Solway Foods Limited, which has factories across the UK and Europe, has over 1,700 employees.

“Its claim to be an equal opportunities employer was not found by the tribunal and none of the respondents had undergone any equality training.

“Most employers have a written equal opportunity policy, but employment tribunals are particularly interested in what happens in practice – the larger the employer, the higher the tribunal’s expectation of them,” she added.

Car-dealership network Pendragon plc operates more than 250 retail outlets around the country under names such as Stratstone, Evans Halshaw and Chatfields.

Together, these outlets hold over 20 franchises for passenger vehicles, motorcycles and trucks, including such marques as Jaguar, Ferrari, Vauxhall, Ford and Porsche.

The company has also been told by an employment tribunal in Sheffield to pay compensation to 40 of its workers for failing to meet the national minimum wage.

Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs told the tribunal that Pendragon made deductions from the workers’ pay for the use of lease cars and salary-sacrifice schemes, causing their remuneration to fall below the national minimum.

To meet the underpayments the firm, which employs around 400 people at its headquarters in Little Oak Drive, Annesley, has been ordered to pay a total of £30,354.68 to the 40 workers, along with £5,000 to HMRC.

“The Government have washed their hands of pleural plaques victims,” complained UCATT General Secretary Steve Murphy.

“On the one hand they admit that it is unfair that all sufferers won’t receive compensation and in the next breath they reveal they intend to do nothing about it.

“Plaques victims have suffered irreparable scarring to their lungs due to prolonged exposure to asbestos,” he continued.

“Employers knew the risks workers faced but didn’t care.

“The fact that pleural plaques sufferers in England and Wales are still denied compensation while those in Scotland and Northern Ireland can claim, has created a postcode lottery for asbestos victims.”

Mr Murphy was speaking after Jonathan Djanogly, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice, admitted it was unfair that people in Scotland and Northern Ireland can receive compensation for having pleural plaques, but those in England and Wales cannot.

“The Government understand that it could be seen as unfair for compensation to be available in one part of the UK but not in another,” pronounced the Under Secretary, “but the civil legal systems in Scotland and Northern Ireland and that in England and Wales are separate and there will inevitably be differences in the law.”

Responding to a question from Stephen Hepburn, the MP for Jarrow, Mr Djanogly then added the Government was not going to do anything about it, stating:

“I can say that in light of the medical evidence, the Government do not consider it appropriate to overturn the House of Lords’ judgment that the condition of pleural plaques is not compensable under the civil law.”

Instead, he suggested, any pleural plaque victim who developed an asbestos-related disease in the future would be able to bring a claim at that point.

Compensation payments for pleural plaques victims were barred as a result of a case taken by the insurance industry to the Law Lords in 2007. Since that decision, firstly the Scottish Parliament which passed the Damages Act and more recently the Northern Ireland Assembly, have passed legislation to restore compensation for victims in their countries.

“Asbestos victims,” said Mr Murphy, “are predominantly ordinary workers.

“This out of touch elitist Government have no conception of the pain and suffering that they and their families experience.”

The 19-year-old agency worker, Wellingborough Magistrates were told, had only been with the company for three weeks when, on 25 August 2010, the incident happened.

As the teenager was being trained to fix a known problem on a running printing press, his left hand was pulled in between two rollers.

Airlifted from the Wellingborough factory of adhesive tape manufacturer Latrave Limited to the specialist hand injury unit at Royal Derby Hospital, he had part of his thumb amputated.

He remained in hospital for five days and was off work for nearly seven months. He still requires physiotherapy and the injury has stopped him pursuing many of his hobbies, including boxing and repairing and riding bicycles.

The subsequent Health and Safety Executive investigation found the machine’s guard was missing and the worker was being trained in an unsafe way.

HSE inspector Mark Austin explained:

“The machine had guards missing, he was shown dangerous practices like keeping it running while fixing it, and he was not properly supervised for someone who had only worked for the company for less than three weeks.”

The company, of Park Farm Industrial Estate, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, was found guilty of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, and was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £14,736.

In March 2011 an unnamed 30-year-old joined Bradford-based textile firm Whitaker Fibres Limited as a wool sorter.

His role involved no contact with any machinery.

A few weeks later, on 23 April, he was instructed to clear the debris from a machine that untangled woollen fibres despite having no experience of, or training in, handling machines at the factory.

Carrying out his allotted task, his hand was dragged in to the unguarded machine.

Before he could pull it free, his trapped glove was shredded and he began to lose feeling in his hand, which was badly cut.

He has been left with scarring from the tip of his right index finger to mid-forearm. He also suffered nerve, tendon and vein damage, resulting in the loss of movement to two fingers and the loss of webbing between two fingers.

Bradford Magistrates’ Court was told the machine that caused the injury was left running while the worker attempted to empty the trays, which were difficult to move because they were jammed by debris.

The court was informed the company had a previous conviction at Bradford Magistrates’ Court in February 2008, following an incident to an employee while cleaning machinery.

Whitaker Fibres Limited, who trade as Howarth Scouring Company, of Cashmere Works, Birksland Street, Bradford, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

The company was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £2,897.35 in costs.

On 22 December 2010 James Hampson, 34, of Knowland Grove, Norwich, installed a new gas boiler and associated pipework at Lynne Brown’s home on Chapel Road in Wrentham, Suffolk.

Two days later, on the morning of 24 December, when Mrs Brown switched on the electric kettle in her kitchen, her home exploded.

Both she and her daughter Lucy Green suffered extensive burns.

The subsequent Health and Safety Executive investigation revealed the joint between the emergency control valve on the boiler and the flexible pipe upstream of the meter had not been properly tightened.

As a result it was leaking gas.

The gas meter and the pipework leading from it were also inadequately secured.

By switching on her kettle Mrs Brown caused the gas, which had leaked throughout the house, to ignite.

As well as the injuries to both Mrs Brown and her daughter, the fire following the explosion caused major structural damage to their home.

“The accident,” said Mrs Brown, “has had a devastating effect on our lives in so many ways, but we are trying to remain positive about the future.”

After the hearing at Ipswich Crown Court, HSE Inspector Malcolm Crowther said:

“Mr Hampson was qualified to do the work but on this occasion he failed to ensure that all gas connections were sufficiently tight, which was a serious mistake.”

Mr Hampson, who was self-employed and trading as Ryan Services at the time, admitted breaching Regulations 6(1) and 7(1) of the Gas Safety (Installation & Use) Regulations 1998.

He was given an eight-month suspended prison sentence, 250 hours of unpaid community service, and was ordered to pay £10,000 costs. His suspended prison sentence will remain active for two years.

On 12 October 2011 the Health and Safety Executive served four Improvement Notices on equipment hire company Rapid Hire (Swindon) Limited.

According to the Executive, the company was failing to provide adequate training for operators of forklift trucks and telehandlers, and was failing to properly inspect equipment that was available for hire.

The purpose of the Notices, Chippenham Magistrates’ Court was told, was to protect employees and customers from potential injury.

Yet, when a HSE inspector returned to the company three months later to check compliance, he discovered that the dangerous practices were continuing and three of the Notices had been ignored.

Speaking after the prosecution, HSE inspector Ian Whittles said:

“Rapid Hire blatantly ignored warnings and the Improvement Notices served to them, neglecting its duty of care to its employees and customers.

“Even though there were no reported incidents, serious safety breaches continued and these could easily have resulted in serious injury.”

Rapid Hire (Swindon) Limited, of 14 Devizes Road, Swindon, was found guilty of three separate breaches of Section 33(1)(g) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 for failing to comply with the notices.

The company was fined a total of £800 and ordered to pay £1,215.95 in costs.

“This company had ignored previous warnings and enforcement notices from HSE, and continued to neglect their duty of care to their workers,” asserted Health and Safety Executive Inspector Abosede Ogunsekan.

Speaking after the hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court, he explained:

“Even though there were no injuries in this instance, serious safety breaches were continued by this construction company which could have resulted in serious injuries.”

The construction company in question, Croydon-based Anza Limited, had been found guilty in absentia of single breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.

Magistrates heard the firm had initially received advice from the HSE and been served with a Prohibition Notice about managing the risk from falls on 18 May 2009.

Nine days later, on 27 May, the company was then served with an Improvement Notice, requiring welfare facilities to be provided at the site on Honour Oak Road in Forest Hill.

The site was then visited again on 1 July 2009.

Inspectors found insufficient measures in place to prevent workers using stairs to access the lower level of the site from falling.

As a result, a second Prohibition Notice was served for fall prevention.

Inspectors also realised the company had failed to comply with the requirements of the Improvement Notice issued on 27 May.

Despite Anza Limited, of Wydehurst Road, Croydon, now being in liquidation, the company was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £6,752.

“This case,” declared Elaine Taylor, Head of the COPFS Health and Safety Division, “demonstrates yet again the importance of employers and contractors being aware of the risks, not only to their own employees, but to all of those who may be affected by the work they carry out.

“If Mr Riva,” she added, “had taken the simple steps necessary to identify the risks associated with his work and acted upon them, Mrs Ross would not have lost her life in an entirely avoidable incident.”

She was speaking after Haddington Sheriff Court had heard how John Martin Riva had been contracted to rebuild the chimney on a property in Gifford, East Lothian.

The work was carried out between 8 August 2009 and 26 October 2009. But, on completion, he failed to check the chimney was completely clear of any debris and masonry materials that might have fallen in.

Unfortunately, it was not.

The blockage, the court heard, impeded the combustion process of the solid fuel fireplace in the living room, and caused the fumes from the fireplace to build up, causing an accumulation of carbon monoxide to which the three occupants of the house were exposed

Mrs Ceridwen Ross, aged 60 years, died on 26 October 2009 as a result of the exposure.

HSE Inspector Gillian McLean commented:

“This was a tragic incident which could easily have been prevented if the accused had carried out simple and well-established tests to ensure the chimney was free from obstruction following building work he had carried out.”

49-year-old Mr Riva was fined £15,000 after pleading guilty to a contravention of Sections 3 and 33(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Alister McNeilly was working for Brian George Mackie, who specialises in roofing work and trades as Donside Slating.

On 10 November 2010 Mr McNeilly, together with a colleague, had gone to fix lead onto the flat roof area of a house in Strathdon.

Standing on the roof, Mr McNeilly was throwing lead cut-offs onto the ground when he either slipped or inadvertently stepped off the edge.

Losing his balance, the 26-year-old fell five metres to the ground below.

He severed his right hip ball joint from his thigh bone.

In hospital for four days having a metal plate and four pins inserted, he was off work for 16 weeks. He has largely made a full recovery, although he still experiences pain in his hip.

Following the incident, an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive found that no scaffold platform with guard-rails and toe-boards, or any other form of fall prevention equipment, had been put in place to prevent falls, either from the edges of the flat roof or at the edge of the lower porch roof.

That investigation also revealed Mr Mackie had not been to the site that morning or in the three or four days prior to the incident and had not given any specific instructions about how to do the work.

At Aberdeen Sheriff Court, Brian George Mackie, 43, of Auld Kirk, Rough Park, Strathdon, was fined £15,000 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 4 of The Work at Height Regulations 2005.

On 11 March 2011 self-employed ground worker Ross Smith, 23, from March in Cambridgeshire, was helping to build a roadway at a construction site on Wolsey Way, Lincoln.

Along with another worker he was operating a compacting machine, filling the roadway with stone, in preparation for surfacing.

The stone was being brought to the area in a six-tonne dumper truck from the top of the site.

As he saw the front-loaded truck approaching, Mr Smith went to move his machine away.

But before he could do so the driver, who was concentrating on avoiding other obstacles, collided with him, and drove over his right foot.

Mr Smith suffered four broken bones.

The subsequent HSE investigation revealed the principal contractor, Maypine Construction Limited, had failed to provide a suitable traffic route around the site, had failed to manage and monitor construction activity, and had failed to carry out a suitable risk assessment.

After pleading guilty at Lincoln Magistrates’ Court to breaching Regulation 22(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007, and Regulation 3(1)(b) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, the company, of Enterprise Road, Raunds, Northamptonshire, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5,749 costs.

After the hearing HSE inspector Martin Waring said:

“Vehicles at work continue to be a major cause of fatal and major injuries and as such need to be carefully managed to avoid injuries such as this.”

“The state of the Carrwood site was an absolute disgrace when we visited it,” declared HSE Inspector Ian Betley.

“We immediately issued six enforcement notices to ensure the safety of the people working there.”

The inspector was speaking after Trafford Magistrates' Court heard how Stephen Cartwright, a roofer from Blacon near Chester, was badly injured in a fall from scaffolding at a house on Carrwood, in Hale Barns, on 31 May 2011.

When the Health and Safety Executive investigated, they found the scaffolding in a poor condition. There were also unprotected gaps in the floors and walls.

The six enforcement notices stopped some of the work activities on the site and required improvements to be made.

44-year-old Mr Cartwright fell approximately three metres from scaffolding with no safety rail and landed on a flat garage roof, sustaining serious injuries to his right leg, including a dislocated knee and broken bones.

His employer, New Generation (Manchester) Limited, was prosecuted for three breaches of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007, for failing to properly plan and manage the work, for failing to provide a safe place to work, and for failing to ensure the site was in a good state.

The company, of Sackville Street in Manchester pleaded guilty all three offences and was fined £3,900, and ordered to pay £4,000 in prosecution costs.

Yesterday we reported how Amber Engineering Limited, who trade as Amber Services, of the Recycling Centre Dyffryn Business Park, Ystrad Mynach, Hengoed, had pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 at Cardiff Crown Court.

Shortly after posting that story, news broke that officers from Environment Agency Wales were investigating a fire at the company’s premises.

Around 200 tonnes of mixed construction waste, which was not thought to be hazardous, was said to be ablaze.

A spokesman for the Agency commented:

“Our officers are currently assessing the environmental impact of the fire, and we are working with South Wales Fire and Rescue Service to ensure that impact on the local environment is minimised.

“Amber Services Waste Management is a regulated site and we will take any action as necessary to prevent it happening again.”

According to reports, fire crews from Cefn Forest, Pontypridd, Caerphilly and Cardiff Central were called to the site at 4:30 in the morning.

Ten appliances and a hydraulic platform were used to tackle the blaze.

Such was the smoke that Gwent Police were forced to close the A469 between Ystrad Mynach and Llanbradach.

By 10:45am the fire had been extinguished. Fifteen minutes later police reopened one lane of the A469 in each direction.

South Wales Fire and Rescue Service succeeded in retaining most of the water used to tackle the blaze on site through interceptors and drainage systems, although a small amount may have entered the River Rhymney. So far, this has had minimal impact on the river.

Having received complaints about the state of Tockwith Airfield in York, Environment Agency officers decided to investigate.

Visiting the site in February 2010, they found around 40,000 stored tyres, some inside a lorry trailer. Most were in a poor condition.

The site, officers discovered, was being rented by Paul Ketteridge, aged 51, of Lyndon Avenue, Bramham, Leeds, a director of Eco Terra Tyres Limited.

Because the site was not licensed by the Agency, he was informed tyres could not be stored there.

In response, Mr Ketteridge explained the tyres came from the airfield and he was removing them. However, when questioned, he accepted some had been brought to the site by Eco Terra.

Selby Magistrates’ Court heard that between 26 March 2010 and 13 April 2010, Agency officers visited the airfield on five further occasions and, on all but one, saw tyres being taken from vehicles and thrown on to the site.

In May 2010 a survey showed tyres now covered an area of 3,026m2. As a result Mr Ketteridge was arrested the same day.

Interviewed, Mr Ketteridge argued the site was licensed, because tyre shredding had occurred there in the past. He also maintained he was moving tyres off site, rather than bringing them on.

Although he agreed to remove the tyres at the rate of seven tonnes a day, subsequent inspections showed little progress. One visit even indicated that more tyres had been dumped.

On 30 June 2011, a further meeting took place with Mr Ketteridge and his company secretary, Darren Avey, to discuss the clearing of the tyres at Tockwith Airfield.

At the meeting it was suggested that the tyres could be taken to 1 Avenue Road, York, to be shredded and baled. However, before this could be done an exemption or environmental permit, as well as planning permission, would be needed.

On 25 November 2011, Police and Environment Agency officers searched 1 Avenue Road. They found an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 tyres being stored there. The address is located right next to residential houses.

The tyres were later removed by the Environment Agency at a cost of £6,625.

Three days later Agency officers searched Mr Ketteridge’s home address and found a pile of 150 tyres adjacent to his house, along with some worn tyres in his back garden.

Acknowledging he was breaking the law by storing tyres at home, Mr Ketteridge explained the tyres were from cheque paying customers, but he lacked the funds to pay for their disposal.

Then, on 27 March 2012, at a separate hearing at the same court, Mr Ketteridge was found guilty of flytipping tyres into a wood at Goodmanham, Market Weighton.

On that occasion a member of the public had seen a man throwing tyres from a van into the wood and took down the registration number. Traced back to Mr Ketteridge, he claimed when questioned to have stopped his van at the side of the road to stabilise loose objects in the back.

In court, Mr Ketteridge admitted two waste offences in relation to Tockwith Airfield, and three further waste offences in relation to thousands of tyres dumped at Avenue Road, York and 31 Lyndon Avenue, Bramham.

He was given a 12-month prison sentence.

At the same hearing, Eco Terra Tyres Limited, of Dringthorpe Road, Dringthorpe, also admitted four waste charges relating to tyres at Tockwith airfield, and was fined a total of £400 – magistrates accepted the company had no assets.

Bedford Magistrates’ Court have fined leading anaerobic digestion company Biogen UK Limited £5,000 for polluting one mile of a Bedfordshire stream.

According to the Environment Agency, the pollution was avoidable and should have been notified sooner to enable the incident to have been better managed.

Bedford Magistrates’ Court heard how, after a pump was left on overnight at the company’s Clapham Biogas Plant at Twinwoods Farm on 19 November 2010, around 300,000 litres of digestate from an anaerobic digester overflowed.

On arriving for work at 4am, a member of Biogen staff saw liquid running down the road.

One hour later, another employee saw more liquid in a field close to their own pig unit, operated by Bedfordia Farms Limited.

Biogen is part of the Bedfordia Group.

However, the Environment Agency was not told of the pollution until late that afternoon.

Although an investigating officer arrived on site within 30 minutes of being informed it was already dark, and he had trouble assessing the effect and taking samples.

In the building housing the anaerobic digester tank a tide mark could be seen on the door, about 6in from the ground, indicating the level reached by the liquid waste.

The officer also saw puddles on either side of the road and a trench full of liquid in the field.

The company’s staff had dug the trench in an attempt to prevent the liquid reaching the pig unit. They had also tried to dam the stream.

In daylight the following day it was clear the dams had failed to hold back the pollution, and the company was advised as how to improve their effectiveness.

The pollution continued to spread beyond the dams for at least two more days.

Despite a similar incident two months earlier at another of the company’s sites near Rushden, the tank had no alarm system and had to be turned off manually.

Magistrates were told the company’s environmental permit clearly stated that overfill alarms and protection devices had to be installed on all fixed tanks for the treatment and storage of waste.

The need for such alarms had also been raised a month before during a site audit.

Since the pollution a system of alarms, nightly checks and twice-weekly electrical checks had been introduced.

After pleading guilty to breaching Regulations 12(1)(b) and 38(1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, Biogen UK Limited was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,677.

“This investigation,” said Environment Agency Prosecution Team Leader Angus Innes, “has been one of the biggest and most complex ever undertaken by the Agency.”

He was speaking after Isleworth Crown Court jailed 64-year-old Hugh O’Donnell and his two accomplices – Robert Evans, 62, and Peter Lavelle, 28.

The three men, all of Reading, were sentenced in June for running a multi-million pound waste crime business from a site the size of five football pitches in nearby Aldermaston.

A raid by the Environment Agency and Thames Valley Police had previously found evidence of illegal waste activity, an unlicensed handgun and ammunition, other weapons, stolen vehicles, plant equipment and almost £50,000 in cash.

Profits were laundered though the various trading names and aliases used by O’Donnell and his associates.

Over a six-year period O’Donnell’s turnover was 100 times the amount declared to the Inland Revenue, and he was found to own several properties in Berkshire, a luxury villa in Alicante, Spain, and numerous heavy plant vehicles.

At a confiscation hearing the judge, HHJ Edmunds QC, said:

“Mr O’Donnell candidly said monies were paid into an account used by him to conceal ownership of assets and to transfer money to keep it safe from investigators.

“Indeed, there were a number of accounts in different names, all in an effort to conceal assets. He conducted businesses in ways designed to deceive.”

Having already been given the longest ever prison sentence for waste crime offences, O’Donnell has now been ordered to repay more than £917,000 under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Should he fail to do so, he faces a further four and half years in jail.

In June 2011 O’Donnell was originally sentenced to four years in prison for money-laundering and 22 months for waste offences to be served concurrently, the day after being released from prison for the firearm offences.

The Environment Agency claims to have identified approximately 650 active illegal waste sites in England and Wales.

More than 300 are within 50 metres of schools, homes or sensitive environmental sites, yet they are still operating.

As long ago as last December a 90-strong specialist taskforce was set up by the Agency to blitz serious, organised waste crime, an exercise anticipated to take two years.

This team, the Agency says, is to work closely with enforcement partners “to gather intelligence and act quickly to close illegal waste sites and bring operators to justice”.

Amongst the first fruits from the exercise has been Operation Ammolite, involving the Metropolitan Police, British Transport Police, local authorities, the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency and HMRC.

In Barking and Dagenham, Tower Hamlets and Enfield 63 waste vehicles were stopped to check they had the correct permits. Officers found 13 without the required waste carriers licence. They now have seven days to produce the correct paperwork to avoid prosecution.

Elsewhere, Environment Agency officers targeted 53 waste sites across Barking and Dagenham, Tower Hamlets, Enfield, Hackney, Waltham Forest and Newham to build an intelligence picture of the area and take enforcement action against environmental criminals.

Fourteen sites were found to be operating illegally, including two involved in the illegal export of electrical waste and two who were mishandling hazardous waste.

The Agency will now work with the site operators to bring them into compliance or take enforcement action, which could include prosecution.

According to the Environment Agency, more operations like this are planned to ensure problem sites continue to be uncovered and pressure is kept on those who try to dodge the costs incurred to treat waste properly.