HEALTH AND SAFETY

Fire precautions - fire officer imposing conditions requiring sprinkler system to cover areas outside premises to be certificated - conditions inappropriateNorthamptonshire County Fire Officer v City Logistics Ltd: CA (Lords Justice Kennedy, Chadwick and Rix): 25 July 2001A company, having obtained consent for its warehouse under the Building Regulations 1991 in an industrial area, applied for a fire certificate.The chief fire officer imposed conditions requiring installation of sprinklers outside the warehouse building as necessary to protect the property and neighbouring properties.Justices dismissed the company's appeal against those conditions.

The Crown Court allowed the company's appeal.

Mr Justice Turner allowed an appeal by the fire officer.

The company appealed.Elizabeth Appleby QC and Hugh Richards (instructed by Myers Cowley, Hemel Hempstead) for the company.

James Coudie QC and Witold Pawlak (instructed by County Solicitor, Northamptonshire County Council, Northampton) for the fire officer.

Timothy Corner (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and Regions (intervening).Held, allowing the appeal, that since the object of the Fire Precautions Act 1971 as a whole was clearly to protect the persons from the risks of fire inside the building where the fire had occurred, the conditions aimed at protecting the properties of neighbours, which were not related to the escape of persons from the premises on fire, were inappropriate; that the appropriate time to consider fire certificate conditions was the time when an application was made under the Building Regulations 1991 to the local authority, which should consult with the fire officer for his requirements to avoid any frustration likely to be experienced by building occupiers dealing with two authorities who might be making different structural demands.

(WLR)