Unless the world really has gone mad.
This is government legislation we're talking about. It's often completely mad.
That they are not does not make it reasonable to disregard whatever way is defined in order to make things fit what you think they should be.
BAS & I might disagree on what the regulations actually mean, but on that point I agree. It's not for us to try and second-guess what the legislature
intended the regulations to say and to apply them accordingly. We can go only on what the regulations actually
do say. Whether the results are logical and consistent from any sort of technical point of view is entirely different matter, and it's not hard to find many examples where "common sense" contradicts the letter of the legislation.
Thinking about the particular case at hand, here's another comparison to consider surrounding that definition of what "an outdoor lighting or electric power installation" is supposed to include for the purposes of schedule 4.
As I mentioned above, my initial reaction in the absence of anything explicitly saying otherwise is to interpret that as meaning any part of an electrical installation which is outdoors (hence the outside light on the exterior wall of the house comment earlier).
So what about the situation where the easiest route to extend a circuit from one room of a house to another room is to route the cable through an external wall, along the outside of the house, then back inside again, using conduit or whatever other method is deemed suitable? Clearly that run of cable is outdoors, but is it part of an "outdoor electric power installation" as such? Are we talking about only the location where power is actually utilized, or does it also include apparatus intended merely to convey power from one point to another? (Hence my question earlier about a switch at the front gate: Obviously it's electrical apparatus, but it's not lighting or other equipment intended to
use electrical power.)
If any part of the installation being outside makes that part an "outdoor electric power installation" for the purposes of schedule 4, then that circuit extension run along the outside wall of the house would be notifiable.
To be logical and consistent, if that intra-house extension run on the outside of the wall is deemed
not to be notifiable because it's not actually supplying any lighting or other utilization equipment located outdoors, then BAS' assertion that the underground cable to the garage in the case at hand is not notifiable in itself must also be correct, since it's the same scenario - Only the cable itself is outdoors.
So how many people who think that the underground cable to the garage is notifiable will agree that the intra-house extension run along the outside wall is also notifiable?