That has nothing to do with EHRC and there is not even a mention of Human Rights in that article.. A corporate manslaughter charge based on non compliance with design standards is not a Human Rights issue.
Sorry, but you have got it completely wrong.
1.12 The European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the first sentence of Article 2(1) ECHR as laying down a positive obligation on States to take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction.
1.13 This positive obligation to protect life includes a duty to secure the right to life by putting in place effective criminal law provisions to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law-enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and sanctioning of breaches of such provisions. This positive obligation includes an obligation to put such effective measures in place to protect individuals against threats to their life not just from activities of the State but also from other private parties.
<.....>
Where it is established that the negligence attributable to State officials or bodies … goes beyond an error of judgment or carelessness, in that the authorities in question, fully realising the likely consequences and disregarding the powers vested in them, failed to take measures that were necessary and sufficient to avert the risks inherent in a dangerous activity …, the fact that those responsible for endangering life have not been charged with a criminal offence or prosecuted may amount to a violation of Article 2, irrespective of any other types of remedy which individuals may exercise on their own initiative.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200506/jtselect/jtrights/246/24604.htm