1. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (FSO) became effective last October 01, 2006; and only covers England and Wales. As stipulated within this legislative order, all non-domestic buildings or properties (workplace, vehicle, vessel, aircraft/hovercraft, any installation, any tent or movable structure) must comply with all the requirements of a fire certificate; this embraces houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) and blocks of flats. The compliance is under the accountability of a “responsible person” who may be occupiers of a single occupancy premises or the owner and occupiers of a multiple occupation building or property.
The responsible person must show that he or she has provided appropriate fire escape routes and is also liable in the appropriate installation of common parts and systems for fire safety procedures which incorporates a fire emergency plan. Likewise, the responsible person should assign one or more competent individuals to assist him or her in the execution of the precautionary and deterrent measures which include taking account of all legal persons who are present within the premises (Force Fire Consultancy Ltd. , n. d: n. p.) 2.
The law of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (FSO) applies to “every person who has control/responsibility of the premises to some extent” (Force Fire Consultancy Ltd. , n. d.: n.p. ), which implies that the responsible person in the workplace who is the employer may appoint some of his or her employees to help in the implementation of the fire safety measures. This means that to a degree the appointed or assigned employees have a responsibility or liability in aiding their respective employers in the proper execution of the Fire Emergency Plan should disaster strike and to keep the vicinity of their workplace as safe as possible against any forms of fire hazards. 3.
Under the new legislation the seven different types of discrimination which employers must be aware of (Forum of Private Businesses, 2010: n. p.) are: 1. Direct Discrimination – occurs when a person is not given a fair chance and opportunity like his or her peers in the workplace because of some distinctive characteristics. 2. Associative discrimination – this type of direct discrimination pertains to being prejudice against a particular individual because he or she has a relationship or association with another person who has a definite kind of trait or personality. 3.
Discrimination by perception – this kind of direct discrimination is exhibited when individuals are perceived or thought about differently because they are suspected or thought to have certain characteristics without any solid proof. 4. Indirect discrimination – happens when the company or organization have certain rules or policies which may apply to majority of the employees but may inconvenience an individual or a minority of the workforce because of possessing a certain type of personality or trait. 5.
Harassment – is an action or deed considered insulting by the individual at the receiving end. Workers or employees can protest about any kind of demeaning behaviour in the workplace even if it is not intended for them personally. 6. Harassment by a third party – employers must take all necessary precautions in protecting their employees from aggravation provoked by any third person who are not under their employ because they are responsible for any such nuisance. 7.
Victimization – this discrimination arises or happens when a particular person or individual is maltreated because he/she or they have provided support for any grievance that was filed by a third person under the Equality Act 2010. 4. The hierarchical structure of the UK Court System: Note: Intermediate offences like theft can be tried in either the Magistrate Court or Crown Court. 5. The duties of landowners in connection to the hazards resulting from naturally flowing water under English law are: 1) that he/she is liable for any damage done when he/she alters the natural course of a stream cause by abundant rainfall; and 2) that he/she must ensure to prevent or reduce any probable flood damage to neighbouring lands that can originate from his/her property (Lamont, 2008: 2-10). 6.
For a claimant to be successful in cases of private nuisance under English law, he or she must be able to prove substantially that the event which may have resulted to damages according to Legal Norms (2010: n. p.) must have been an ongoing occurrence.
Meaning the situation should have been going on for a continuous length of time and not just a single solitary incident. Additionally the “test of reasonable forseeability” must have been determined beforehand in order to be able to recover any payment for damages being sought by the claimant. 7. The neighbour rule is basically based on the Christian rule of loving thy neighbour. Taken in a legal context this is where a person, company or corporation must do everything reasonably possible to prevent or eradicate any likely error or oversights that may harm others who may have a connection to the services or products they offer.
The neighbour rule came from the case of Donoghue vs. Stevenson. The scenario surrounding this case started when Donoghue went with a friend at a café and ordered a bottle of ginger beer. As the beer bottle is dark in colour the remains of a decomposing snail was not immediately seen and was only detected when Donoghue was refilling her glass. But she already drank some of the beer before the discovery giving her shock and gastroenteritis.
Unfortunately Stevenson (the beer manufacturer) should have maintained quality standards by doubly rechecking its products before shipment. As such the beer manufacturer in this case has not done all possible means to keep its products clean and free of any items that can harm its end consumers; who in this case are considered as its neighbours (Robinson, 2010:n. p.). References Force Fire Consultancy LTD. Fire Consultants n. d., Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, viewed 30 July 2011,. Forum of Private Businesses 2010, The Equality Act 2010: protected characteristics and types of discrimination, viewed 30 July 2011,. Ilex n. d., The Legal System of the United Kingdom, viewed 29 July 2011,. Lamont, Camilla Landmark Chambers 2008, Flooding – Private Law Claims, viewed 30 July 2011,. Legal Norms 2010, Private and Public Nuisance, viewed 29 July 2011, < http: //www. legalnorms. com/nuisance. php>. Robinson, Zoe Kirk 2010, Negligence Claims and Duty of Care, viewed 30 July 2011,.