Legal precedent established by prosecution of Colchester restaurateur

27/01/2009

A recent legal case has highlighted the need to abide by any Enforcement Notice issued by a Fire Authority. In a case which has established a legal precedent, Essex County Fire & Rescue Service fire safety officers issued a prohibition notice to Feyzullah Ozgurcu, a partner of Crystal Restaurant Ltd of St Botolph Street Colchester. Several subsequent inspections found that the terms of the Prohibition Notice had not been complied with which led to a prosecution by Essex Fire Authority.

Magistrates hearing the case put forward by Essex Fire Authority legal representatives David Stotesbury and Roy Carter (head of Essex Fire & Rescue Service Legal Department) agreed with the prosecution that the case represented a serious breach of fire safety legislation and that a potential hazard to public health had been incurred by the failure of the defendant to respond to the Prohibition Notice.

The defendant was ordered to pay a fine of £10,000 and additional costs of £15,000.

The case is unusual in that the Prohibition Notice had been issued prior to the introduction of the new Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order 2005 when the Fire Precautions Act 1971 was still in force. ECFRS's barrister David Stotesbury concluded that the prosecution should be brought under section 10B of the 1971 Act.

The successful prosecution therefore represents a clarification of the relationship between prior legislation and present fire safety legislation which should establish a useful precedent for similar prosecutions in the future.

After the hearing Roy Carter stated that "this case shows that we take our duty for the protection of life extremely seriously and we will enforce the law where others show a blatant disregard for legislation designed to protect the public."

Any employers hoping that confusion between prior and existing legislation could be used as an excuse for not fulfilling their current fire safety obligations have been presented with clear evidence to the contrary.