The High Court has ruled that East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service must pay compensation to the families of two fire-fighters, who died following a fireworks factory blaze in 2006.
Fire-fighter Geoff Wicker, 49, and fire-service cameraman Brian Wembridge, 63, died in the fire at Marlie Farm, Shortgate in December that year.
Nathan Winter, the son of Alpha Fireworks owner Martin Winter, was working outside, preparing a fireworks display for a Christmas lights ceremony, when one of the fireworks caught fire. A number of other fireworks exploded, and the fire spread through buildings on the site.
The fire reached a metal container illegally packed with fireworks, causing a huge explosion that killed both Mr Wicker and Mr Wembridge, and injured 20 others. In December 2009, Martin and Nathan Winter were jailed for manslaughter. No criminal charges were brought against any member of the East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service (ESFRS).
Owing to the illegal storage of fireworks, the Winters’ insurance was invalid, leaving victims of the explosion no choice but to seek compensation elsewhere. A civil case against ESFRS began at the High Court in February this year.
The judge found that those attending the fire should have known more than they did and that there was a significant risk of explosion from fireworks in bulk.
“The risks from inadequate knowledge and inadequate training on such a subject were foreseeable and, indeed, obvious,” he concluded. “Better training on this issue would have meant that [those on the fireground] would have had a markedly higher level of concern about the container and its contents.
“This would probably have led to an earlier evacuation of the fireground, and should and would have led to an effective evacuation, once that decision had been taken . . . This failure was thus causative. Had all personnel been removed — even to 200 yards — the deaths and injuries would have been avoided.”
There was also a failure to ensure that Marlie Farm was properly inspected, and that a risk card for the site was prepared and made available for fire-fighters who attended the scene.
Following the judgement, which was issued yesterday (30 July), Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), said: “Common sense and justice have prevailed, and the judge’s ruling reflects the systemic and cultural failures of those responsible for ESFRS.
“Although the ruling cannot undo Geoff’s or Brian’s tragic deaths, fire-fighters can be relieved that their employers cannot merely renounce their duty of care, as had been argued.”
Chief fire officer and chief executive of ESFRS Des Prichard said: “The judge listened carefully for two weeks to the evidence, but did say that this was a very complex matter and he would take some considerable time to make his judgment.
“It is only right that we give due consideration to the careful thoughts of the judge and now look at that document in detail before we make a further response.”
Fire Safety in 2023 eBook
SHP's sister site, IFSEC Insider has released its annual Fire Safety Report for 2023, keeping you up to date with the biggest news and prosecution stories from around the industry.
Chapters include important updates such as the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and an overview of the new British Standard for the digital management of fire safety information.
Plus, explore the growing risks of lithium-ion battery fires and hear from experts in disability evacuation and social housing.
Steve K, the fireworks may not have been stored there at the time of the assessors visit, if the container was used for temporary storage at peak times (Nov 5th and New Year).
Nobody should got to work to be injured/killed but the ‘seek compensation elsewhere’ bit does leave a sour taste. One wonders how much compensation has been paid against how much the legal bill is.
I think employers need ensure that they have adequate training, policy and procedures in place. It is not just a case of suing whoever has money, but taking full responsibility for employees.
This is yet another example of the insurance companies avoiding paying out through loopholes and small print. Agreed, if there were no injuries and only damage to property owned by the employer; refuse to pay out, but this has forced the victims to sue the government effectively. Why should our taxes cover this!!
Isn’t the key to this “Owing to the illegal storage of fireworks, the Winters’ insurance was invalid, leaving victims of the explosion no choice but to seek compensation elsewhere”. Sue whoever has got money (whether they’re to blame or not).
Why was this not picked up by the annual Insurance Company visit to the site, assessing risk factors. Surely the Insurance company risk assessor completing his audit/survey must have noted some corrective actions. How many external checks do these type of high risk operations have each year, surely this needs to be Increased.
It isn’t the insurance companies’ fault – ILLEGAL means just that – they didn’t know it was there so the risk was not the one presented to them. It has gone further down the blame chain to find a source of compensation – but the blame still has to be proved at law – seems the fire authority hadnt appropriately trained their personnel to deal with these types of fires….hence the findings.