Sprinkler appeal upheld
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• by Steve Mcqueen A Court of Appeal victory by transport and logistics firm City Logistics could spare warehouse operators thousands of pounds in additional fire prevention costs.
The written judgement last week said that a sprinkler system only needs to be installed at City's Northampton site if the means of escape is insufficient.
Northampton Fire & Rescue Service (NF&RS) had argued that, in addition to protecting its employees, City's fire prevention measures should include sprinklers because of the potential for damage to nearby properties in the event of fire (CM 12-18 July). The environmental impact and the safety of firefighters or others attending were also key issues.
The Court of Appeal ruling should halt any further re-interpretation of complex fire regulations and allay fears among some large warehouse operators that sprinkler systems might have to be retrofitted. The case has now been referred back to the Fire Authority and costs estimated at over £400,000 were awarded against the NF&RS.
However, NF&RS says because the ruling confirms sprinkler systems could still be required if the means of escape is insufficient, it is a hollow victory. "That's what we always wanted to establish."
It says a petition to the House of Lords is being prepared to challenge the inference that firefighting equipment—such as fire extinguishers—are no longer required in a building as long as people can get out safely.