Home / Regulatory support / Safety certification / Enforcement of safety certificate Enforcement of safety certificate A local authority has several enforcement options available in order to respond to a risk or safety weakness at a ground covered by a safety certificate. The response of the local authority must be proportionate to both the urgency and the seriousness of the case. It may choose between the following enforcement options: a reduction in the permitted capacity of all or part of the sports ground the issuance of a prohibition notice or in the event of a breach of the safety certificate conditions, a warning, simple caution or prosecution. The enforcement options and requirements for local authorities are outlined in full in the Guide to Safety Certification. Guide to Safety Certification Section 8 of the Guide to Safety Certification provides full details on enforcement of a safety certificate. Read the full guidance Enforcement Policy Local authorities should put in place an Enforcement Policy to ensure consistency and accountability when taking enforcement action. It should clearly set out how the local authority aims to ensure that enforcement is fairly applied. This can be evidenced by the following principles: proportionate in applying sports ground law and ensuring compliance; consistency of approach; targeted enforcement action; transparency about how the local authority operates and what those regulated may expect; and accountability for the local authority’s actions. Template Enforcement Policy The SGSA has created a template Enforcement Policy which can be adapted based on each local authority’s requirements. Enforcement Policy Template Reduction in the capacity of a sports ground If an incident suggests that the management of a sports ground is performing poorly, the local authority should review the (S) factor and hence the capacity of the sports ground or a particular section of the ground. The same applies if there has been no incident but the sports ground management’s overall performance during an event appears deficient and / or it does not appear to be fully in control. Similarly, if the local authority’s inspecting personnel identify any deficiencies in the fabric, equipment, records or management systems, that the authority has not already taken into account when accepting or calculating the permitted capacity, it should review either the (P) or (S) factor, as appropriate. Wherever possible, the two parties should also agree a programme of remedial measures or improvements. Once these have been implemented, the local authority should consider restoring the original capacity. There is a clear onus on the local authority to act reasonably and in accordance with due process, not least because the certificate holder has a right of appeal against any reduction in capacity. Appeals against a reduction in capacity imposed by way of an amendment to a safety certificate or against a prohibition notice are to be submitted to a Magistrates Court within 21 days. Where an appeal is made against an amendment to a safety certificate, the amendment cannot take effect until the appeal is heard. Issue a prohibition notice Section 10 of the 1975 Act empowers the local authority to issue a prohibition notice for all or part of any sports ground if it considers that the admission of spectators involves a risk to them that is so serious that, until steps have been taken to reduce it to a reasonable level, admission of spectators ought to be prohibited or restricted. The prohibition may be general or may apply to a particular event. A prohibition notice is a measure of last resort. It should only be used where an amendment of the safety certificate is not considered an effective way of dealing with the risk(s). In practice, it is likely to be required only if the problem is urgent or the certificate holder or management of the sports ground appears unable or unwilling to rectify the situation before the next event. A prohibition notice must specify: the nature of the risk to spectators; and the number of spectators that may be admitted to the sports ground. The notice may also include the steps that need to be taken to reduce the risk to a reasonable level. The Department of National Heritage Circular of 16 November 1995 outlines the powers and responsibilities under section 10 of the Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975, which allows local authorities to issue prohibition notices for sports grounds if they are of the opinion that spectators are likely to be at serious risk of injury. Penalties for contravention of the safety certificate It is an offence for any responsible person, not merely the certificate holder, to contravene the terms and conditions of a safety certificate or a prohibition notice. Where it appears to the local authority that an offence, however minor or technical, may have been committed, it should consider its response, having regard to the facts and merits of the case and taking care to apply the normal rules of evidence. Warning In very minor cases, particularly if the certificate holder has immediately taken action to prevent any repetition, the local authority may determine that no further action is warranted, though it may wish to warn those responsible regarding their future conduct. Simple caution In more serious cases, for example where people have been put at risk but the offence appears to be an isolated oversight, the local authority might wish to administer a simple caution (previously referred to as a formal caution). A simple caution should only be issued for offences where there is no imminent risk or where the offence is readily admitted and immediate action has removed that risk. If the offender commits a further offence, the caution may influence the decision to take a prosecution. Prosecution In the event of persistent or flagrant breaches of a safety certificate, or those which have seriously prejudiced spectator safety, the local authority could consider bringing a prosecution under the 1975 or 1987 Act. The decision to prosecute is very significant and must be related to risk. In general, it should be reserved for those who: refuse to implement basic legal requirements and who put the public at risk. blatantly disregard the law; and/or