Health and Safety - Scottish Construction Contracts - page 444

that which is feasible, was applied by the Court of Appeal in Lee v. Nursery Furnishings
Ltd (1945). Prefixing 'practicable' with 'reasonably' creates a qualification whereby
the extent of the risk requires to be balanced against the measures necessary to avert
that risk, a form of cost benefit analysis, see Sharp v. Coltness Iron Co. Ltd (1937) and
Edwards v. NCB (1949) subsequently approved by the House of Lords in Marshall v.
Gotham Co. Ltd (1954).
What is reasonably practicable depends upon whether the time, trouble and
expense of the precautions suggested are disproportionate to the risk involved. What
is reasonable for a large undertaking may be unreasonable for a small undertaking.
It should be noted that 'reasonably practicable' has been held to have a narrower
meaning than 'physically possible', see the decision of the Court of Appeal in Marshall
v. Gotham Co. Ltd (1953).
20.4 The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007
20.4.1 Introduction
he Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (henceforth 'the 2007
Regulations') came into force on 6 April 2007.
The 2007 Regulations revoke and replace the Construction (Design and Manage-
ment) Regulations 1994 ('the 1994 Regulations') and revoke and re-enact with modi-
fications the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996.
The 2007 Regulations give effect to the requirements of Directive 92/57/EEC on the
implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile
construction sites, save for those requirements which were implemented by the Work
at Height Regulations 2005.
The 2007 Regulations are divided into five parts. Part 1 deals with the formali-
ties of citation and commencement, interpretation and application; Part 2 sets out
the general management duties which apply to construction projects; Part 3 sets out
additional duties imposed where the project is notifiable; Part 4 deals with the duties
relating to health and safety on construction sites; and Part 5 deals with the gen-
eral matters of civil liability, enforcement, transitional provisions and revocations and
amendments.
20.4.2 Regulation 4
Regulation 4 provides that no person on whom the 2007 Regulations place the duty
shall appoint or engage a CDM co-ordinator, designer, principal contractor or con-
tractor unless he has taken reasonable steps to ensure that the person to be appointed
or engaged is competent.
In a similar vein, no person can accept an appointment or engagement unless they
are competent. The Approved Code of Practice for the 2007 Regulations states that,
to be competent, an organization or individual must have sufficient knowledge of the