The short version
- Foster + Partners was acquitted of responsibility for the 2018 death caused by a falling window, with the jury accepting their limited role in technical design details.
- Project managers St James and engineers Lindner Prater were convicted under health and safety laws for failing to address known risks after a similar incident occurred months earlier.
- The prosecution argued that outward-opening windows posed foreseeable dangers that were ignored despite previous warnings, leading to the fatal accident on Albert Embankment.
A London court has delivered a split verdict in the case of a fatal accident involving a falling window from a luxury residential tower, clearing the prestigious architecture firm Foster + Partners of responsibility while convicting the project’s managers and engineers. The decision resolves a high-profile legal battle concerning the death of Mick Ferris, a 53-year-old coach driver who was killed instantly in 2018 when a heavy glass pane detached from a penthouse unit at The Corniche development on Albert Embankment.
The jury at Inner London Crown Court found that St James, the project management company, and Lindner Prater, the engineering firm responsible for the project, had breached their duty to ensure public safety under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. These convictions stand in contrast to the acquittal of Foster + Partners, the practice founded by Norman Foster that is known for iconic structures such as the Gherkin and the Reichstag building. The court also cleared Wintech Ltd, another engineering firm involved in the design process.
The incident occurred when a 130-kilogram window was blown off its hinges from approximately 90 meters above the street. Prosecutors presented evidence that strong winds forced the outward-opening window beyond its intended limit, causing the glass to clash with the frame and pry the hinges loose. A woman pushing a wheelchair narrowly avoided being struck by the debris as it fell near Ferris. The prosecution emphasized that the danger was not unforeseeable, noting that a similar window panel had fallen from the same building just over a year earlier without injuring anyone.
Central to the case was the failure to modify the building’s design after the initial incident in August 2017. Jurors heard that despite this prior warning, no changes were made to the window specifications or safety protocols. The prosecution identified twelve specific opportunities where designers could have reassessed the risks associated with outward-opening, side-hung windows but failed to do so. This lack of response suggested a disregard for the potential catastrophic consequences if the safety restrictors were compromised.
The design history of the windows revealed significant changes that may have contributed to the hazard. Originally, the windows were intended to open inward. However, this plan was altered to prevent interference with an internal ceiling coffer containing wires and pipes. The switch to outward-opening windows introduced new mechanical stresses. A restrictor device had been installed to prevent the windows from swinging too far, but evidence showed that this safety feature had been removed before the fatal incident occurred.
Prosecutor Gordon Menzies argued that the accident was not merely a chance event but the result of ignored warnings. He stated that the wind strength was sufficient to overcome the window’s limits, leading to the hinge failure. The prosecution contended that Foster + Partners should have been aware of these risks given their extensive experience with glass-heavy structures. However, lawyers for the architecture firm maintained that their role was strictly limited to visual aesthetics and that they were not involved in the technical engineering decisions that led to the safety failures.
The defense for all four defendants argued that they had done everything reasonably practicable to ensure safety. They denied any negligence or breach of duty. The jury deliberated for more than eleven hours before reaching their verdict, distinguishing between the responsibilities of the architectural visionaries and those managing the technical execution of the build. This distinction allowed Foster + Partners to avoid liability while holding the operational teams accountable.
Following the death, the window design was reverted to inward-opening configurations, a change that had not been implemented despite earlier warnings. A spokesperson for Foster + Partners expressed continued sympathy for Ferris’s family and acknowledged the jury’s careful consideration of the case. The convictions of St James and Lindner Prater highlight the legal consequences of ignoring safety precedents in construction projects, particularly when prior incidents signal potential hazards.
The case underscores the complex liability structures in modern architectural projects, where aesthetic design and technical engineering are often separated. While Foster + Partners escaped criminal charges, the guilty verdicts against the project managers serve as a stark reminder of the legal obligations to maintain safety standards. The outcome may influence how future developments handle risk assessments and design modifications, especially when early warnings of structural or mechanical failures emerge during construction.
St James and Lindner Prater have been approached for comment regarding the verdict. The Health and Safety Executive, which brought the prosecution, had sought to establish that the designers ignored concerns about the proven dangers of outward-opening windows. The court’s decision reinforces the principle that foreseeability of harm, combined with a failure to act on known risks, can lead to criminal liability even when no direct intent to cause harm is present.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian World↗Foster + Partners cleared over man’s death when window fell from London penthouse
