Martin Ellis

1. 1. unauthorised access to restricted dam

   “The dam is apparently not open to members of the public, but Mr [name redacted] and his family were able to visit it with ease, not even knowing that it was restricted, still less having access prevented”

2. 2. inadequate warning signage

   “I found at inquest that the only warning sign was old, in poor repair and covered by foliage, so could not be seen”

3. 3. exposed live wiring

   “The electrocution was caused by exposed live wiring in a galvanised metal conduit”

4. 4. lack of report provision

   “I understand that the Chief Electrical Officer visited the site in the days after Mr [name redacted] death and that the Ministry of Infrastructure, Ports, Energy and Labour is responsible for the Saint Lucia investigation. However, six months after Mr [name redacted] death, no explanation has been provided to his family or to HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London, as to why there was an exposed live wire. Despite repeated requests, neither Mr [name redacted] family nor I have been provided with a copy of the Chief”

5. 5. potential regulatory failure

   “The dam was built in 1996. I do not know whether the unsafe wiring is a result of a lack of appropriate building regulations enforcement”

No published response was found on judiciary.uk.