Suppose the OP had written the post as follows:
'Possible justification for deviating from MI's regarding fuse rating'
A certain fridge is supplied with a 13A fuse in the plug and the MI's state that this size is to be used. However, the consumption is low, a fraction of an amp when running, and I suspect even the stall current would not blow or even stress a fuse of much lower rating, maybe even as low as 3A. Therefore, although the unit presumably conforms to the applicable standards as-is with a 13A fuse and would be regarded as safe, deviation from the MI's to use a smaller fuse might yet add marginally to its safety in the event of certain types of fault. For example, reducing the risk of fire in the event of motor failure and gross overcurrent that the internal thermal protection does not successfully disconnect, or reducing the energy dissipated at a short-circuit fault. Given the disparity between the actual current and the implied need for a 13A fuse, and the fact that any reliability disadvantage from using a smaller fuse is one of lost functionality rather than reduced safety, I contend that it is a good example of where the application of technical knowledge can enhance safety compared to slavishly following MI's.
On the same subject although not enhancing safety, subject to Zs and VD, the appliance could manifestly run from its own dedicated circuit wired in 1.0mm² on say a 10A MCB. Yet BS7671 requires the cable to be a minimum of 1.5mm² on account of it being a 'power' circuit, despite carrying lower load than many lighting circuits.
I think more of us might have agreed.
Of course, the whole thing rests on the stall current, which means one of use has to hook an ammeter in series with a fridge and twiddle the thermostat while it's running to stall the compressor.
