top of page
  • Writer's pictureRobert Spicer

Prohibition notice: failure to comply: D&S Building Solutions Ltd and director fined

Prohibition notices: failure to comply: £2000 fines

Health and Safety Executive v D&S Building Solutions Ltd and Daniel Schipor (2018) Westminster magistrates’ court, June 6

Statutory reference: ss. 22 and 37 of the Health and Safety at Work, etc., 1974 (HSWA).

A construction company and its director have been fined for failing to comply with prohibition notices.

The facts

  • The company was served with two prohibition notices on site. Persons were at serious risk of fall and injury from the unprotected edges of an excavation and at immediate risk of injury from potential collapse of the unsupported excavation.

  • The company and its director took no steps to comply with the prohibition notices which prohibited any work near the open edge of the excavation.

  • It had not taken measures to prevent dislodgment of material and collapse of the excavation.

The decision

  • D & S Building Solutions was fined £2000 plus £2000 costs under s.22 of HSWA.

  • Daniel Schipor, the director of the company, was fined £2000 plus £2000 costs for a breach of s.37 of HSWA.

Recent Posts

See All


Limitation Case TVZ v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2022] EWHC 7, Hugh Court Facts Eight men who had been sexually abused by a football coach in the 1980s claimed compensation in negligence fro

Crown immunity and the rule of law (3)

Civil proceedings Until 1948 the Crown could not be made a party to a civil action. This was an offshoot of the principle of sovereign immunity. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 changed this rule. The C

Crown immunity and the rule of law (2)

Recent examples In June 2018 prison officers were taking part in a petrol bomb training exercise. This was part of an eight-day commanders course at the National Tactical Response Group training facil


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page