This quote is taken from regulation 5 of RRFSO 2005 (3) Any duty imposed by articles 8 to 22 or by regulations made under article 24 on the responsible person in respect of premises shall also be imposed on every person, other than the responsible person referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2), who has, to any extent, control of those premises so far as the requirements relate to matters within his control. (4) Where a person has, by virtue of any contract or tenancy, an obligation of any extent in relation to— (a)the maintenance or repair of any premises, including anything in or on premises; or . (b)the safety of any premises, . that person is to be treated, for the purposes of paragraph (3), as being a person who has control of the premises to the extent that his obligation so extends. I would highlight the words tenancy or contract to which is should be covered by contract of employment or dutys of employees with regard the 74 act? In ireland it is clearly written in legislation.

Hi Sarah, in the first example you have quoted, I suggest that the staff who stopped the flow of water over the cooker should be commended for their initiative, rather than prosecuted or disciplined. The volume of water from even a single open sprinkler head is considerable and it all has to go somewhere, finding its way down to the lowest level via all sorts of ways: electrical switchgear and conduits, under carpets, behind the plaster walling, through ceilings etc. Your second example is a very different scenario as jodieclark's response illustrates. From memory I have heard of prosecutions being brought by Fire Services but have no current access to specifics.