FOI Request 2184

Subject: Beechmere Prosecution of WSP

Status: In Progress

Date received: July 2025


Question Asked:

Please could you disclose the minutes of any meeting and any internal emails that relate to the decision to withdraw the prosecution of WSP UK Ltd in February 2025 in the CFRS v Avantage and others case relating to the fire at Beechmere, Crewe in 2019.


Our Response:

Please see our response below to your Freedom of Information Request.

We can confirm that Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service does hold information regarding the decision to withdraw from the prosecution in relation to Beechmere.  However, having reviewed the data I have concluded that we are unable to release the information requested and we are therefore issuing a Section 17 - Refusal Notice.

The Freedom of Information Act provides a number of exemptions from the requirement to release certain information. After careful consideration we regret to inform you that we are unable to disclose the information you have requested. The decision not to disclose has been made in accordance with Section 42 as the information you have requested is covered under Legal Privilege.  

Section 42 - Legal Professional Privilege is not an absolute exemption it is a qualified exemption under the Act and therefore I am required to conduct a Public Interest Test.

The Public Interest Test looks at factors for and against disclosing the information you have requested. 

Factors for disclosing  

Contribute to public understanding. 

Openness and transparency in decision making process. 

Accountability of public money expenditure scrutiny of actions. 

Factors for not disclosing    

Legal Professional Privilege protects the confidentiality of communications between a professional legal advisor and its client.  This allows clients to be completely frank and candid with their legal advisor when obtaining legal advice without the fear of disclosure.

Conclusion   

Given the importance of the principle behind Legal Professional Privilege which safeguards the openness in all communications between the professional legal advisor and their client, which the client supposes is confidential and is fundamental to the administration of Justice.   


Outcome: Refused

FOI responded to within timescales: YES

Further action: ICO Complaint


Back to FOI requests


Last updated: Friday, 23 January 2026


Share