http://www.theiet.

org/cpd

Reasonable
Practicability
Health & Safety Briefing No. 17
February 2015

www.theiet.org

This Briefing relates specifically to UK legislation terminology.

Did you know

The UK Health and Safety at Work Act leads to legislation made under the Act that may be absolute or qualified by expressions
such as the need for duty holders to ensure reasonable practicability. (So Far As Is Reasonably Practicable - SFAIRP or As Low
As is Reasonably Practicable - ALARP)
It is important to understand that in this case the word practicable is used in a legal sense. It should not be confused with the
rather vague term practical, meaning able to be used in real life. Practicable infers a statuary obligation that has to be carried
out if, in the light of current knowledge it is feasible, irrespective of cost or difficulty. This is often simplified to if it can be done, it
must be done.
The term reasonably practicable allows for a cost benefit analysis to be used when determining the actions to be taken
in response to an identified risk, or for a comparison to be carried out with good practice in similar circumstances. The
preventative measures taken should however be commensurate with the magnitude of the risk.
Both practicable and reasonably practicable are statutory criminal liabilities in health and safety legislation. Ultimately, the
courts decide whether duty holders have complied with their obligations but case law has established certain precedents and the
Health and Safety Executive have published useful guidance. A pivotal case in the law on SFAIRP/ALARP was that of Edwards v
The National Coal Board (1949) see: http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarpglance.htm. This case established that a computation
must be made in which the quantum of risk is placed on one scale and the sacrifice, whether in money, time or trouble, involved
in the measures necessary to avert the risk is placed in the other; and that, if it be shown that there is a gross disproportion
between them, the risk being insignificant in relation to the sacrifice, the person upon whom the duty is laid discharges the
burden of proving that compliance was not reasonably practicable.
HSE guidance has been published on how this should be interpreted and the use of Cost Benefit Analysis. Several important
points should be noted:
There should be a transparent bias on the side of health and safety. For duty holders, the test of gross disproportion implies
that, at least, there is a need to err on the side of safety in the computation of health and safety costs and benefits.
Whenever possible, standards should be improved or at least maintained, thus current good practice is used as a baseline the working assumption being that the appropriate balance between costs and risks was struck when the good practice was
formally adopted.
Certain hazards are regulated through a safety case regime requiring an explicit demonstration in the safety case that control
measures introduced conform to the ALARP principle.

Further Information
General information on risk management can be found on the HSE website http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/index.htm
Guidance given to HSE inspectors regarding ALARP and SFAIRP http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/alarp1.htm
HSEs decision making process: Reducing Risks: Protecting People - HSE Books, ISBN 0717621510
http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/r2p2.pdf

These Briefings contain a summary of recent Health & Safety issues, provided for general information purposes only, and should
not be relied upon as legal advice. The IET has tried to make the Briefings accurate and informative, but they have not been
prepared by a lawyer and may not constitute an up-to-date summary of the law. The IET accepts no liability for your use of these
Briefings. Further details and information on broader Health & Safety issues can be obtained from the Governments Health and
Safety Executive. Legal advice should be obtained on any specific issues.

For further information about the IETs Health and Safety Policy Advisory Group only, please
contact:
Health and Safety Policy Advisory Group Secretary
Policy Department
IET,
Michael Faraday House,
Six Hills Way,
Stevenage.
SG1 2AY
01438 765690
email: policy@theiet.org
www.theiet.org/policy
http://www.theiet.org/factfiles/

This content can

contribute towards your
Continuing Professional
Development (CPD) as
part of the IETs CPD
Monitoring Scheme.
http://www.theiet.org/cpd

The IET 2015

The Institution of Engineering and Technology is registered as a Charity in England & Wales (no 211014) and Scotland (no SC038698).