Do you know what is being tipped on your land? Too often will farmers, landowners, livestock owners, etc. trust that when they ask someone to tip soil onto their land (perhaps for the purpose of levelling a field), they are tipping honestly acquired and lawful soil. It might not cross their mind, in tightknit communities, or in such supportive industries, that whoever they have asked to tip onto their land might have an alternative agenda to get rid of improperly acquired trommel fines or toxic waste.

Where a person tips waste or toxic material onto land controlled by another, the person with control over that land is at risk of prosecution, if that person does not have a waste permit or if the disposal of the material is not in accordance with any waste permit they might hold. These prosecutions are often brought by the Environment Agency; however, prosecution is not the only way for them to deal with such offences.

The standard method of dealing with these offences in criminal proceedings are:

1. A warning
2. A formal caution
3. Prosecution

It is also available to the Environment Agency to offer an enforcement undertaking as a civil sanction in certain circumstances, which can often require the person in breach of the regulations to rectify the issue.

It is important to engage legal representation as soon as possible if you wish to try and discuss with the Environment Agency dealing with your case by an alternative method to prosecution.

The question of knowledge when considering offences such as these is an interesting one. Where the scale of the tipping is such that it could arguably amount to an “operation” under the relevant regulations, the question of knowledge becomes less important. However, where the scale and amount of the waste substance in question is smaller, such that it doesn’t amount to an “operation”, then whether the controller of the land had knowledge of the content of the waste, i.e., whether they trusted the tipper to tip honestly sourced soil, may be relevant. In such circumstances, it will depend on the facts of the case in question, and the extent to which the controller of the land satisfied themselves that whoever they engaged to tip the soil intended to tip compliant substances. Simply taking an individual at their word without further enquiries is not likely to satisfy a Court that the land controller discharged any obligation upon them to make reasonable enquiries.

For criminal offences of this nature, there is a definitive sentencing guideline published to assist in understanding the potential punishments. The guideline itself is split into “organisations” and “individuals” and considers various offences, including the unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment, or disposal of waste.

As with most sentencing guidelines, this publication addresses the question of whether the offence that was committed had “culpability” (i.e., knowledge), and whether it has caused “harm”. For organisations, the most serious offence (i.e., deliberate culpability with category 1 harm) starts with a sentence by way of fine ranging from £450,000 - £3,000,000, although a Court can consider the financial circumstances of the organisation in imposing such penalties. For individuals, the most serious offence can bring with it a prison sentence ranging from 1 – 3 years’ custody.

The definitive guideline for these offences, therefore, takes them incredibly seriously and can make the commission of these offences costly for organisations and brings the risk of prison to individuals.