Under Martyn's Law, the responsible person (and, for enhanced tier premises run by an organisation, a designated senior individual) may need to justify the decisions made to assess risk, protect the public and define appropriate measures.
For many organisations, this is an unfamiliar burden. The issue is not only whether a policy exists. It is whether the decision-making behind that policy is clear and defensible.
The duty sits with whoever controls the premises, often a company or governing body rather than one person. Enhanced tier organisations must also name a designated senior individual.
Leadership teams need clarity on responsibility, governance and decision-making.
Good decisions need clear facts, a stated reason and evidence behind them.
The challenge is not simply understanding the legislation. It’s making decisions that may one day need to be defended.
Understanding who is accountable and what decisions they are responsible for.
Assessing risk in the context of people, premises and operations.
Defining measures that are appropriate to the operating environment.
Strengthening oversight, assurance and organisational accountability.
Decision Assurance is Aegis' approach to helping organisations move from legislative obligation to a defensible position.
It supports leadership teams to understand the decisions they are accountable for, define a proportionate position, document the rationale behind those decisions, strengthen readiness, governance and assurance and build a position capable of standing up to scrutiny.
Decision Assurance runs on Aegis's own methodology. CLEAR is how a decision is reached, VITAL and SHIELD score the risk behind it, and CORE is how it is written down, so the Responsible Person can explain it to the regulator, an insurer or a board months later.
Collect the facts, Look at the site as it really runs, Evaluate the risk, Assess what is reasonably practicable, and set when to Review.
Exposure is scored separately from consequence and vulnerability, so the priorities rest on evidence rather than assumption.
Context, Options, Rationale, Evidence: what was known, what was considered, why this option was chosen and what supports it.
Our commitment to leadership teams is to bring clarity on responsibility, risk, proportionality, governance and evidence.
Clear answers to common questions about Martyn's Law responsibilities, governance and advisory support.
No. Compliance matters, but Martyn's Law also creates a decision-making and accountability challenge for senior leaders.
A defensible position means your organisation can explain the decisions it has made, why those decisions are proportionate and how they align to your operating context.
Because organisations need to interpret their responsibilities in context. A generic checklist may not be enough to show that decisions were informed and proportionate.
Organisations should act early. Getting to a sound position requires assessment, leadership engagement and proportionate action.
Responsible Persons should consider who holds responsibility, what decisions they are accountable for, whether Martyn's Law applies and whether current decisions could withstand scrutiny.
Discuss Martyn's Law responsibilities, leadership accountability and decision assurance with Aegis.
