The line starting: "the cross sectional area shall be not less than 2.5mm² copper equivalent...." isn't "the next part of the reg", it's the end of the paragraph starting "If the protective conductor:...", and should be read as part of that paragraph, which includes (iii), (iv) and (v), hence the meaning I drew from it in post 15.
If it was a separate clause, it would start with a capital letter.
OK fair enough HS, I am not sure it makes it any clearer though, why insert that part at all if it did not apply to the above exceptions ?, as I said it does not draw any distinction between a CPC and other types of protective conductors such as SB, earthing conductors or any other type of protective conductor, so surely if we apply that reg to other types of protective conductor why should it not apply to a CPC ?
I will have a look later through GNs, 1, 5, and 8 to see if it clarifies anything (not holding my breath lol), in the meantime I will just agree to disagree lol, besides it is no big deal to me as I am over and above anyway.
Last edited: