Safety Case vs Safety Case Report

A principle requirement of the new regulatory requirements of The Building Safety Act 22, is the introduction of a safety case regime to oversee the management of building safety risks in high-rise multi-occupied residential buildings. This new approach is designed to provide greater assurance that risks have been assessed and proportionate steps are in place to manage them on an ongoing basis, ensuring residents are safe in their homes.

This is a huge culture shift, and one that anyone involved in Defence Aviation following the Nimrod tragedy in 2006 and the advent of the Military Aviation Authority will be familiar with. The question we asked then, and one I hear being asked now within the building sector is “what exactly is a safety case”?

The definition I like, adapted from aviation for a building, goes like this: 

A safety case is a structured argument, supported by a body of evidence that provides a compelling, comprehensible and valid case that a building is safe for residential occupation. 

The definition goes on to explain that it is through-life, cross-stakeholder and addresses a combination of the physical components, procedures and human resources organised to construct and manage the building.

This is different to the safety case report, which is a snapshot of the live safety case at any given moment. A safety case is the mechanism through which the Accountable Person(s) understands and manages the risk they hold. 

The point of a safety case is similar to that of a case in law. A barrister presents a clear and compelling argument for the innocence of their client and supports it with evidence. In a simple case the verdict could be delivered based on one argument with associated evidence: “She didn’t do it, your honour (claim) because she was abroad at the time of the crime being committed” (argument) and here is her flight ticket, flight passenger manifest and photo of her on the beach” (evidence). A barrister would never simply submit a pile of evidence to the judge and expect them to wade through it to join the dots and deliver a verdict. 

In the case of a building, an argument might look like this:

“The external wall system material and construction will not contribute to the spread of fire in or around the building” (claim) because “The Phenolic foam insulation has low flame spread and negligible smoke emission” (argument). “The insulation is not exposed and there is no cavity to enhance flame spread” (argument). Both are supported by the “Fire Core sample inspection report” (evidence)

When writing a safety case, ensure you have joined the dots between your claims, arguments and evidence and confirm that the evidence is valid, in date and accessible. Please get in touch for advice about how to build your safety cases and for a demo of our customisable, digital safety case tool with automated reporting functionality.