Understanding food legislation in the UK: Why it’s harder than it looks

Why “keeping up with legislation” is harder than it looks

Understanding food legislation is essential. Most food businesses believe they are “up to date” with legislation, by receiving alerts, skimming industry articles and maintaining a legislative register.

And yet, during audits, the same issues appear repeatedly:

1. Missing requirements.
2. Incorrect scope.
3. Out-of-date interpretations.
4. Fixing reliance on information sources that are no longer up to date.

1. Missing requirements

This happens when a business is aware of a regulation but has not identified all the legally linked measures that sit underneath it.

For example:

• A site references a primary regulation in its legal register.
• However, one or more implementing or amending regulations introduce additional obligations.
• Those additional requirements have never been assessed or implemented on site.

From the business perspective, this often sounds like: “We didn’t realise there was another regulation linked to that.” From an enforcement perspective, it is simply non-compliance.

2. Incorrect scope

This occurs when a business assumes legislation either does or does not apply, without checking the actual legal scope.

Common examples include:

• Assuming a regulation applies only to manufacturers, when it also applies to importers or distributors.
• Assuming small volumes or niche products are excluded, when they are not.
• Assuming a requirement applies to all food businesses, when it is limited to specific product categories or processes.

This typically results in:

• Controls being implemented unnecessarily, or
• Legal requirements being missed entirely.

Both outcomes may create a non conformance at audit, because it highlights to the auditor that the business doesn’t understand what legislation is relevant to them.

3. Out-of-date interpretations

Legislation evolves. Requirements change through amendments, replacements, and transitional provisions.

Out-of-date interpretation usually arises when:

• A regulation has been amended, but site procedures still reflect the old wording.
• Transitional arrangements have expired, but controls were never updated.
• A consolidated text is relied on without understanding when changes took effect.

Again, this shows that the business doesn’t understand the legislation and therefore it puts you at risk of a non conformance.

4.Relying on information sources that are no longer up to date

Trying to understand legislation is really difficult. It takes time and focus, both of which most techies don’t have the luxury of. Using the internet is the most obvious solution, but unfortunately these websites are rarely updated in line with legislation and therefore you could be using inaccurate information.

These sources are often:

• Written at a point in time.
• Not updated when legislation is amended.
• Lack visibility of what has changed since publication.

As a result, compliance decisions are made using information that may be legally obsolete.

So how do you fix these issues?

The good news is that these problems are not random.
They occur for predictable reasons — and that means they can be addressed systematically.

Each issue requires a specific, deliberate approach.

1. Fixing missing requirements

The problem:
Focusing only on primary legislation means legally linked obligations are missed.

The fix:
Legislation must be tracked as a hierarchy, not as individual documents.

In practice, this means:

1. Identifying the primary regulation first.
2. Checking all implementing, delegated, and amending acts linked to it.
3. Treating those linked acts as part of the same legal obligation, not as optional extras.

A compliant legislative register should therefore show:

• The primary legislation.
• All secondary legislation that amends, implements, or supplements it.
• Confirmation that each linked requirement has been assessed for applicability.

This approach ensures no legal obligations are missed from the register.

2. Fixing incorrect scope

The problem:
Assumptions are made about whether legislation applies, instead of checking the legal scope.

The fix:
Applicability must be determined by reading the scope and definitions, not by relying on job titles or business size.

In practice this must be completed by someone who understands legislation, so that the required information can be identified and understood.

To ensure that the correct scope is established, this means:

• Checking who the legislation applies to (e.g. food business operators, importers, distributors).
• Checking what it applies to (specific products, processes, or activities).
• Documenting why legislation is in scope or out of scope for your business.

Being able to explain why something does or does not apply is just as important as the conclusion itself. Auditors are not testing memory — they are testing understanding.

3. Fixing out-of-date interpretations

The problem:
Controls are based on old versions of legislation or expired transitional arrangements.

The fix:
Legislation must be reviewed for changes, not just acknowledged as “updated”.

In practice, this means:

• Checking whether amendments introduce new requirements or remove old ones.
• Identifying the date changes apply from, including transitional periods.
• Reviewing existing procedures and records against the current legal position.

Legislation updates should trigger a simple question: “Does this change anything we currently do?”

If the answer is yes, the change must be reflected in documented controls.

4. Fixing reliance on information sources that are no longer up to date

The problem:
Internet-based information sources are used as a substitute for legislation, even though they are no longer reflect the law as it currently applies.

The fix:
Online information sources should be treated as context-setting tools, not as the legal authority.

In practice, this means:

• Using online articles and guidance to support understanding, not to determine compliance.
• Verifying key conclusions against the current legislative text.
• Ensuring there is a clear audit trail from site controls back to legislation.
• Periodically reviewing relied-upon sources to confirm they still reflect the law.

If information from an online source cannot be verified against legislation, it should not be used to support compliance decisions. It’s always best to use the legislation as the first source of information and only use additional websites to help you to learn and understand what the legislation means.

Conclusion

Legislation must be more than a register of references. It must be understood so that it can be applied correctly within business systems.

Understanding food legislation is difficult. Its structure and language are complex, and it requires experience to interpret it accurately and translate it into practical, workable controls.

This is exactly why we built Smart Knowledge Plus — to provide a source of legislative information that businesses can rely on as accurate, current, and relevant. We translate legislation into clear, practical insight so you can focus on applying it within your business, rather than trying to decipher legal text.

Each week, we review hundreds of legislative updates, align them to our structured legislation framework, filter out those that are not relevant, and highlight the ones that are.

Members have access to:
• Structured legislative hierarchies.
• Clear scope and applicability explanations.
• Verified updates with impact summaries.

In the next article, we’ll look more closely at primary vs secondary legislation, and why understanding the difference is critical to understanding food legislation.

Smart Knowledge Plus – membership

Join now and gain access to our legislation library and save yourself the headache of trying to keep up to date with legislation updates.

For more information please contact info@techni-k.co.uk or hit the chat button on the bottom corner of your screen.