Yes, work on a special installation is notifiable no matter where it is.
OK.
In that case if you link [is it not in a kitchen or special location] and [is it not a special installation] with
or, then as you pointed out, it only needs one of them to be true for it to be not notifiable.
So work which
is a special installation, i.e. work which is
not [not a special installation] (as you also pointed out, the two nots cancel each other out, so "is not not" ≡ "is") becomes non-notifiable if the other of the two alternatives is true.
So a special installation which is not in a kitchen or special location becomes non-notifiable.
please read my edited post above..
OK
do you not see the flaw in that remark?
you are saying then that ONLY work in a kitchen or special location on a special installation is notifiable? meaning that if it's NOT work on a special installation ( ie adding sockets to existing circuits etc ), then work in a kitchen is NOT notifiable..
No - you've got 2B around the wrong way again.
2B is not a list of conditions which if false make the work notifiable, it is a list of conditions which if true make it non-notifiable.
And the difference is crucial, because of the way that AND, OR and NOT interact.
As I said above, (NOT (x OR y)) is not the same as ((NOT x) OR (NOT y)).
For the work to be not notifiable via Para 2 of Schedule 2B is has to be
(a) Work which is not in a kitchen or special location
AND it has to be
(b) Work which is not a special installation
AND it has to be
(c) Work which consists of adding light fittings and switches to an existing circuit etc.
It's only by having AND (b) that you don't end up with a special installation being non-notifiable when it's not in a kitchen or special location.
The way that Schedule 2B works is that you stop, and exit with a "non-notifiable" answer
as soon as you get a match.
So if you have it saying "It's not notifiable if it's not in a kitchen or special location OR <a list of other conditions>" then you stop if it's not in a kitchen or special location, because the things that come after the OR are irrelevant. You've answered "Yes", or "True" to one of them, i.e. the "not in a kitchen or special location", so you don't need to consider the others, you've come out with a TRUE from your (a) OR (b) OR (c)..
lets look at this another way..
"tomorrow I will mow the lawn if it is not cold and not cloudy" <- your structure
this means that you will ONLY mow the lawn if it is both sunny and warm
but not if it's cold but sunny, or warm but cloudy.
"tomorrow I will mow the lawn if it is not cold or not cloudy" <- my structure
this means that you will mow the lawn if is sunny but cold, or if it's warm but overcast, or if it is sunny and warm..
In this example "mowing the lawn if" is analogous to "becomes non-notifiable if".
I can't stress often enough what 2B is about. 2B is a list of things which if any are true make the work non-notifiable,
not a list of things which if any are false make it notifiable.
Sorry if this is a bit large - it might be a struggle to get the right balance between size and legibility.
The shaded square is, I think, what we are both agreed on regarding notifiablity of kitchens, special locations and special installations, and the highlighted parts in the bottom middle square show where your structure breaks down.
It shows hiw, when you reject my structure and adopt yours you end up with a result equivalent to saying that if the work is not a special installation but is in a kitchen or special location, it's non-notifiable, and if it's not in a kitchen or special location but is a special installation, it's non-notifiable.
And that's not the case, and it's not what you know to be the case.
You are quite right about what is and is not notifiable - where you are wrong is thinking that the SI has got it wrong. It has not, and neither has AD P which explicitly puts the implied "and" from the SI into
"Work that is not in a kitchen or special location and does not involve a special installation (e) and consists of:"