Can anyone help with the wording of a contract.

Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum

Help Support Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

sjt

House Bee
Joined
May 15, 2011
Messages
143
Reaction score
2
Location
East Sussex
Hive Type
National
Number of Hives
5 at two out apiaries
I have recently moved my hives to land at the back of a council owned cemetery and I've been sent a contract to sign.
Most of it I'm happy with but this section makes me wonder what exactly my 'duty of care' would entail to the intruders.
The wording is:
You as beekeeper have a Duty of Care to:
The public in the vicinity of the hive(s)
Allotment gardeners working nearby
Visitors to the cemetery
Grounds maintenance staff
Intruders - even though it may be clear that their intention was to disturb the colony

The hives are sited 1/4 mile from the road and on grassland well away from anything else and shielded from sight by a hawthorn tree., the whole area is fenced and the gates are locked from 4 in the winter and 8 in the summer.
Would you be happy to sign this?
 
I have recently moved my hives to land at the back of a council owned cemetery and I've been sent a contract to sign.
Most of it I'm happy with but this section makes me wonder what exactly my 'duty of care' would entail to the intruders.
The wording is:
You as beekeeper have a Duty of Care to:
The public in the vicinity of the hive(s)
Allotment gardeners working nearby
Visitors to the cemetery
Grounds maintenance staff
Intruders - even though it may be clear that their intention was to disturb the colony

The hives are sited 1/4 mile from the road and on grassland well away from anything else and shielded from sight by a hawthorn tree., the whole area is fenced and the gates are locked from 4 in the winter and 8 in the summer.
Would you be happy to sign this?

The last line is just specifying what forms part of your duty of care responsibility ... crazy though it sounds .. in the eyes of the law you have a duty of care even to those people who have gained unauthorised access to your property.

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 - "The Act extends the common duty of care to trespassers as well as visitors, providing that this duty is to be required when the occupier has actual or constructive knowledge that a danger exists and that a trespasser is or may be near it. "

The Council are simply extending their responsibility as the Occupier to you as the Tenant. If you want the Apiary site you don't have much choice - but wherever your bees are you are still going to face the same situation if they are anywhere public - or indeed private - but the eventuality is what insurance is for.
 
I would be happy to sign the document, but you should have insurance presumably you are a member of BBKA and are therefore covered by their 3rd party cover. I would also put up appropriate signs at the entry points to the apiary as warning of being stung. This would show Due Diligence on your part.

I am luck my bees at present are on my own land.

Best of luck

Mike
 
I would also put up appropriate signs at the entry points to the apiary as warning of being stung. This would show Due Diligence on your part

I'm never sure about warning signs - there is an argument that by warning of a danger, you admit that you are aware of it, and so obviously haven't taken proper steps to remove the danger!!!
 
I'm never sure about warning signs - there is an argument that by warning of a danger, you admit that you are aware of it, and so obviously haven't taken proper steps to remove the danger!!!

I'm not sure I agree with you Bontbee. If the signs are placed in strategic positions sufficiently far away from the hives then the signs themselves coupled to the safe distance from the hives is an appropriate and reasonable management of risk. The signage should not only state a warning that bees are present and dangerous but should also provide clear instructions to keep a safe distance and not to trespass and for good measure provide sign posting advice of what harm bees can do and what to do in the event of bee stings.
 
I'm never sure about warning signs - there is an argument that by warning of a danger, you admit that you are aware of it, and so obviously haven't taken proper steps to remove the danger!!!

but you cant remove nature can you ?? unless you wipe it out altogether?

I too keep bees in my own woodland, I have multiple signs warning of no trespassing and also bees beware,
 
I too keep bees in my own woodland, I have multiple signs warning of no trespassing and also bees beware,

The national trust asked me to put up warning signs, when i put them all around the side of one of their big pay and display car parks they asked me to remove them, saying they no longer wanted me to put signs up anywhere:hairpull:.
 
Fortunately or unfortunately signs are the way to go as far as covering your rear end. If you have the means of securing the area from the public then do so.
 
Signs are for the general public people mooching around without permission are not interested in signs but a couple will cover you in the event.

In this case I would have a stand that could not be easily pushed over and a strap around hive and stand.

After this apart from an idiot sticking their fingers into the entrance they would need to interfere with the strap to lift off the roof in the hope there is something good inside worth steeling.
 
The national trust asked me to put up warning signs, when i put them all around the side of one of their big pay and display car parks they asked me to remove them, saying they no longer wanted me to put signs up anywhere:hairpull:.

Must be a National Trust policy of not having signage that is not their own.


Yeghes da
 
A few years ago I was working with a major UK retailer on a refurbishment project, the store we were working on was empty and some works were due to be carried out on the roof. The roofing contractor erected a tower scaffold to gain temporary access to the roof, the scaffold was left in place over a Bank Holiday weekend when nobody was working. The site had a perimeter fence and warning signs, the scaffold had an integral ladder but the contractor fastened some Heras fencing panels around the bottom of it to prevent anyone gaining access.

Two young kids got into the site, got past the Heras fence panels and climbed up the scaffold, got on the roof and one fell through a fragile roof light - fortunately he was not seriously hurt. The Health and Safety Executive prosecuted the roofing contractor, the main contractor on site and the retailer with charges under their Duty of Care to the Public - even though these kids had circumvented a fenced site, ignored 'Building site Dangerous working' signs, got past the fence panels around the bottom of the scaffold and were actually trespassing.

The bottom line was that the HSE finally accepted a guilty plea from the roofing contractor as they accepted that there was no signage on the scaffold stating 'Dangerous roof structure - keep off' or words to that effect. There was a fine and the mitigating circumstances (ie: some effort had been made to keep people off the site and the roof, the kids were trespassing and fortunately the injuries were minor) contained the fine at a sensible level. It was clear that the kids were trying to find a way into the store for mischief and this was also taken into account.

So .. I'm not trying to frighten anyone but consider the situation above if one of the kids had died as a result of their actions - would the HSE have pressed for a greater penalty ? Then apply the same circumstances but substitute a hive full of bees as the 'danger' and a child with a severe allergy to bee stings ....

Your insurance will cover the costs of going to court, it will cover the compensation award but what it would not cover is the fine if you do end up in court as a result of your lack of duty of care.

What you have to do is provide enough mitigating circumstances to protect you in the event that you face such an event - which means taking all reasonable precautions - and which could include physical barriers and signage, although physical barriers are the preferred option and recommended by the HSE. The HSE take the view that all accidents are preventable and that someone is always responsible. In the event of an accident causing an injury or death then the onus is upon you to prove that the only person responsible for causing it is the person who was injured or killed - and trust me - that's a pretty tall order.

Do I know what I'm talking about and am I qualified to comment ? - I stood in the dock in 1996, prosecuted by the HSE, on a charge of 'duty of care' when one of my employees fell through a roof of a building that he should not have been on and was told not to go on, he died as a result of his injuries. The HSE took the view that if I could not trust my employees to do as they were told then I had 'insufficient site management in place' and was therefore guilty. I had risk assessments, method statements, training records, lots of mitigating circumstance etc. etc. but the company ended up pleading guilty and accepting the consequential fine of £10,000 and £10,000 court costs because we could not prove emphatically that our employee fully understood the danger he had placed himself in. The court costs and legal fees were picked up by the company's insurers and the fine could have been much higher, but nothing brings back a young man who died and removes the effects on his family or me - it never goes away.

Hopefully, no beekeeper will ever be prosecuted under the duty of care clause but as we follow the USA into an increasingly more litigious society and where the HSE see themselves as a prosecuting agency it could happen ...

I'm with those above who say do everything you can to limit any risk to anyone going near your bees .. and if that can include physical barriers and signage so much the better. You also MUST be insured.
 
Last edited:
The last line is just specifying what forms part of your duty of care responsibility ... crazy though it sounds .. in the eyes of the law you have a duty of care even to those people who have gained unauthorised access to your property.

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 - "The Act extends the common duty of care to trespassers as well as visitors, providing that this duty is to be required when the occupier has actual or constructive knowledge that a danger exists and that a trespasser is or may be near it. "
All absolutely true.

I would be happy to sign the document, but you should have insurance presumably you are a member of BBKA and are therefore covered by their 3rd party cover. I would also put up appropriate signs at the entry points to the apiary as warning of being stung. This would show Due Diligence on your part.

I'm never sure about warning signs - there is an argument that by warning of a danger, you admit that you are aware of it, and so obviously haven't taken proper steps to remove the danger!!!


The Council are covering their @rses by making you aware of YOUR legal responsibilities.
These are actually exactly the same, whether your bees are in your garden or on Council land for which you have a tenancy agreement of any sort (like that contract).

However, where the Council are involved, things need to be done with a bit more formality.
You can demonstrate (hopefully only to the Council's legal department rather than a Court) that you have discharged that duty of care by placing appropriate warning signs, and I think that is what they are (in a roundabout way) asking you to do, and also reminding you that you'd be well-advised to have (eg BBKA) 3rd party insurance. (You have said that the area is fenced off.)


Some dangers, such as death while trespassing on the railway (or bees stinging intruders), cannot be removed. And you wouldn't get very far with a legal argument that you , as a beekeeper, were unaware that bees might sting people ...
 
I'm not sure that the HSE would get involved in a prosecution because my understanding is that the amateur beekeeper would not fall within the remit of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 - there no employer or employee involved - but that is not to say there is no liability in civil law.

A local contractor has a yard that abuts the River Hamoaze. On this land is an disused former WW2 emergency refuelling jetty from which local fishermen and kids fish. A couple of summer ago, a group of local kids got drunk on booze stolen from a parent's drink's cabinet and started tombstoning off the jetty. As the tide receded, one kid landed on a rock and had to be rescued/airlifted by an RAF air sea rescue helicopter. In the event the kid was not badly injured but - and this is the relevant part for this thread - because the occupier of the land was conducting a business from the whole site, the HSE rather than the Police investigated. What saved the occupier from prosecution by the HSE was a sign on his main gate "Private Land - Keep Out". In this instance, the HSE apparently said that this was sufficient, which surprised me because the kids would almost certainly have used an alternative unauthorised but well-used pedestrian access along the river that the HSE inspector had not seen.

Can anybody confirm that the HSE is primarily concerned with incidents where an employer or employee or member of the public affected by the actions or omissions of an employer are involved? Who else might prosecute an amateur beekeeper for failing in a duty of care and under what legislation?

CVB
 
I have out apiaries at a couple of MOD sites and have had to apply for and get permits which I have to carry when onsite as well as logging in at a gatehouse on each visit and have my ugly mug photographed. I also had to provide a full RA, insurance details, full contact details, 24 hrs a day 365 days a year and have signs and a rope barrier erected to provide a 'safe' walking distance around hives on the sites.
Bit of a faff but the sites have given me bumper crops and the hives are very very unlikely to be stolen!
S


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
I'm not sure that the HSE would get involved in a prosecution because my understanding is that the amateur beekeeper would not fall within the remit of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 - there no employer or employee involved - but that is not to say there is no liability in civil law.
...

The Occupiers Liability Acts establish civil law liability.

I have recently moved my hives to land at the back of a council owned cemetery and I've been sent a contract to sign.
...
The Council might well be concerned about their liability to their employees, should they have any problem with bees that the Council have permitted to be kept close to the employees' place of work (such as when mowing the cemetery). Like I said, the Council is covering its legal @rse by ensuring that their tenant doesn't get them into trouble - for example by failing to post 'appropriate' warning notices.
 
Last edited:
Not only should you put up warning signs,, but you should photograph the signs with a date stamp.. And store the photos where they will not be lost.

Many nutters will destroy signs and attack bees - and then deny the signs were there.

Belt and braces stuff... been there with HSE..
 
...and have signs and a rope barrier erected to provide a 'safe' walking distance around hives on the sites.

What do they consider a safe distance for the rope barrier?
 
...and have signs and a rope barrier erected to provide a 'safe' walking distance around hives on the sites.

What do they consider a safe distance for the rope barrier?

Depends what the bees are like, but about 300 yards distance from the hives all the way round should cover it.
 
I'm not sure that the HSE would get involved in a prosecution because my understanding is that the amateur beekeeper would not fall within the remit of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 - there no employer or employee involved - but that is not to say there is no liability in civil law.

......

Can anybody confirm that the HSE is primarily concerned with incidents where an employer or employee or member of the public affected by the actions or omissions of an employer are involved? Who else might prosecute an amateur beekeeper for failing in a duty of care and under what legislation?

CVB

You are correct insomuch as my situation was covered by the Health & Safety at Work Act ... but the HSE have jurisdiction over public places and my assumption was that, given the OP's apiary was on Council property, they would clearly have an obligation towards both public and employee health and safety so there is every possibility that in the (unlikely) event of a serious incident with the OP's bees the HSE could be involved.

I suspect that the HSE would be involved as there would be similarities to the situation in 2013 when a farmer's cows trampled and seriously injured a walker.

http://press.hse.gov.uk/2015/farmer-fined-after-cows-cause-walkers-life-threatening-injuries/
 
Sjt, I would suggest that you create a risk assessment of the apiary and supply that to the council. This would show you have assessed potential risks and what actions will be taken to mitigate this risk. I have been on the investigative side of HSE stuff in the past and you can not protect against the unknown happening. What you can do is do your best to reduce the risks. I've always found HSE to be professional and understanding. I don't work for HSE! if you want a generic risk assessment for an apiary feel free to pm me and I'll give you one I use.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top