COMPANIES providing outside smoking shelters for staff or customers could fall foul of the upcoming smoke-free legislation if they don't take off the roof or knock down the walls.
This is according to law firm Dickinson Dees which, following its opening of a new practice in York, is warning companies in the city to ensure their shelters are not more than 50 per cent enclosed.
With work and public places set to become smoke free on July 1, Dickinson Dees advises that due to their design, smoking facilities may be classified as "substantially enclosed buildings", making them liable to the smoking ban.
This regulation covers any structure with permanent openings, which are less than half the total area of the walls.
As a result, firms trying to do smokers a favour by installing outside smoking facilities could unwittingly fall foul of the legislation, making it illegal to smoke inside their shelters.
The law firm has also compiled the top three potential pitfalls that companies need to check before the law comes into force.
Enclosed or not enclosed? - any premises are considered enclosed if they have a ceiling or doors and are wholly enclosed or substantially enclosed (there are permanent openings in the walls that are less than half the total area of the walls). This can seriously affect businesses in the construction industry as it applies to both permanent and temporary structures.
Give me a sign - no-smoking signs must be displayed at all entrances featuring the no-smoking symbol and the words "no smoking - it is against the law to smoke in these premises".
Ignorance is no defence - businesses must take reasonable steps to ensure they adhere to the no-smoking legislation. This can mean regular inspections, the development of smoke-free policies and procedures, staff training and keeping written records of incidents.
Michael Hutchinson, partner at Dickinson Dees, said: "To date, talk around the smoking ban has focused on pubs and clubs, with many forgetting that businesses will also be affected.
"It would be as well for companies to make sure they do not fall foul of the legislation for some technical reason, although it is expected regulators will take a common sense approach at least in the first instance."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article