Category: Licensing

Association of British Travel Agents Ltd v Civil Aviation Authority: CA 18 Oct 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1356

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Aviation (Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing) Regulations 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Association of British Travel Agents Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Civil Aviation Authority and Another Admn 16-Jan-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Transport

Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.245376

Thomas v Sorrell: KBD 1674

The plaintiff said that the defendant had sold wine without paying a license fee as required under a statute creating the Company of Vintners.
Held: Vaughan CJ said: ‘every act a man is naturally enabled to do, is in it self equally good, as any other act he is so enabled to do. And so all the schoolmen agree, that actus qua actus non est malus. And that men’s acts are good or bad only as they are precepted or prohibited by a law, according to that truth, where there is no law there is no transgression. Whence it follows, that every malum is in truth a malum prohibitum by some law.’ and
‘A dispensation or license properly passeth no interest, nor alters or transfers property in anything, but only makes an action lawful, which without it had been unlawful. As a license to go beyond the seas, to hunt in a man’s park, to come into his house, are only actions which, without license, had been unlawful. But a license to hunt in a man’s park, and carry away the deer killed to his own use; to cut down a tree in a man’s ground, and to carry it away the next day after to his own use, are licenses as to the acts of hunting and cutting down the tree, but as to the carrying away of the deer killed and tree cut down, they are grants. So, to license a man to eat my meat, or to fire the wood in my chimney to warm him by, as to the actions of eating, firing my wood, and warming him, they are licenses; but it is consequent necessarily to those actions that my property may be destroyed in the meat eaten, and in the wood burnt. So as in some cases, by consequent and not directly, and as its effect, a dispensation or license may destroy and alter property.’
Vaughan CJ said: ‘And note, if a man have particular damage by a foundrous way, he is generally without remedy, though the nusance is to be punisht by the King. The reason is, because a foundrous way, a decay’d bridge, or the like, are commonly to be repaired by some township, vill, hamlet, or a county who are not corporate, and therefore no action lyes against them for a particular damage, but their neglects are to be presented, and they punish’d by fine to the King.
But if a particular person, or body corporate, be to repair a certain highway, or portion of it, or a bridge, and a man is endamaged particularly by the foundrousness of the way, or decay of the bridge, he may have his action against the person or body corporate, who ought to repair for his damage, because he can bring his action against them; but where there is no person against whom to bring his action, it is as if a man be damaged by one that cannot be known.’

Judges:

Vaughan CJ

Citations:

(1674) Vaughan 330, [1673] EWHC KB J85, 124 ER 1098-1113

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kaisha v Green Cartridge Company (Hong Kong) Limited PC 30-Apr-1997
(Hong Kong) The claimants complained of the sale by the defendants of refilled cartridges for use with their printers.
Held: The spare cartridge manufacturer’s appeal failed: ‘repair is by definition something which does not amount to the . .
Approved – Wood v Leadbitter ExcC 22-Feb-1845
The plaintiff complained of being assaulted. He had been on Doncaster Race Course with a ticket. The owner’s servant requested him to leave, and when he refused gently laid his hands on the plaintiff to remove him. The plaintiff said that his . .
Cited – IDC Group Ltd v Clark CA 2-Jul-1992
The court was asked: ‘whether a deed made between adjoining owners and expressed to ‘grant licence’ to the owners and occupiers for the time being of one property to pass over parts of the other in case of fire operated as the grant of an easement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Licensing, Constitutional, Land

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242421

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another: HL 15 Feb 2006

Licensees appealed against the grant of judicial review of decisions granting special removal of old on-licences for premises. The grant had been challenged on the basis that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to make the award because the premises were unoccupied. The relevant legislation had been repealed by the time the matter reached the House but the parties still sought an answer.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Since the decision might still affect the parties, either as to costs, or as might arise from undertakings given, the appeal was not moot. There was no rule of law or practice to make it wrong for the House to continue with the case, though the House itself had a discretion whether to continue it.
Section 15 had to be looked at purposively. In that context, occupation by the local authority with a view to demolition in pursuance of some public interest, in this case the redevelopment of the area, was sufficient occupation to satisfy s15. The strict interpretation proposed by the objectors would bring haphazard results.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2006] UKHL 7, Times 20-Feb-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 496

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ainsbury v Millington (Note) HL 1987
There had been a dispute between the parties as to a council house tenancy, but by the time it came before the House, the tenancy had ceased to exist, and the action was academic.
Held: Once the parties have settled their dispute there remains . .
Cited – Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada v Jervis HL 1944
The parties had disputed the terms of an insurance policy. The House considered whether it could hear the case once the dispute had been settled.
Held: There was no remaining dispute for the House to settle. Viscount Simon LC said: ‘My Lords, . .
Appeal from – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant sought special removal of a justices on-licence from former premises to its new premises.
Held: The special removal procedure was limited to circumstances of urgency. The applicant had to show that the circumstances fell within . .
At first instnce – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others Admn 15-Mar-2004
Objection was made to the removal of an old on-license by the magistrates.
Held: The justices had had no jurisdiction under section 15 because, at the time the application came before the justices, the premises of Mim’s Bar were not ‘occupied’ . .
Cited – Sirius International Insurance Company (Publ) v FAI General Insurance Limited and others HL 2-Dec-2004
The appellant had taken certain insurance risks on behalf of the respondents, subject to banking indemnities. Disputes arose and were settled under a Tomlin order, which was now itself subject to challenge.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The . .
Cited – Madrassa Anjuman Islamia of Kholwad v Municipal Council of Johan-Nesburg PC 1922
‘The word ‘occupy’ is a word of uncertain meaning. Sometimes it denotes legal possession in the technical sense, . . At other times ‘occupation’ denotes nothing more than physical presence in a place for a substantial period of time, . . Its precise . .
Cited – Associated Cinema Properties Ltd v Hampstead Borough Council 1944
For the purposes of rating, where, in addition to legal possession, ‘use and enjoyment’ of the hereditament is required to establish occupation so as to give rise to liability. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238530

Finecard International Ltd (T/A the Ninja Corporation) v Urquhart Dyke and Lord (A Firm) and Another: ChD 10 Nov 2005

The defendants sought an interim ruling that they were not the cause of the claimant’s losses. They had acted as patent agents to license to exploit the claimant’s patent in the UK. They alleged that the failure to complete the registration of the patent in a timely fashion meant that they had been unable to recover losses despite the licence.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2481 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Cook v Swinfen 1966
. .
Cited – Vision Golf v Weightmans (a Firm) ChD 26-Jul-2005
The defendant solicitors were joint tortfeasors, having failed to make an application to court in a timely fashion, when it might have succeeded. It defended the claim saying that had the claimant issued proceedings against a second firm that firm . .
Cited – Governors of the Hospital of Sick Children v McLaughlin and Harvey plc 1987
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Licensing

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234713

Sawyer v Atari Interactive Inc: ChD 1 Nov 2005

The claimant owned the copyright in several successful computer games. He had granted licenses for the use of the software, which licences were assigned to the defendants. Disputes arose as to the calculation of royalty payments, and the claimant sought to exercise his auditing rights. The defendant company in the US handled the accountancy for the group. The defendants argued that the matter should be tried in the US.
Held: The contract provided for the UK as jurisdiction. The bulk of the witnesses and of the evidence and of the sales were in the US. Evidence would also be required from an intermediate licensee in the US. The natural forum was the US. The contract however clearly stipulated for England. The defendant had not made a timely application to challenge jurisdiction as required under the amended rules. Nevertheless, the court had jurisdiction to extend time and would grant it. It was accepted that the claimant had established sufficient prospect of success. The real issue was as to English law as chosen by the parties. The parties has already submitted to an English arbitration. In all the circumstances, the forum for the entire matter should be in England.

Judges:

Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2351 (Ch), [2006] ILPr 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 11(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Columbia Tristar Home Video (International) Inc v Polygram Film International BV (Formerly Manifesto Film Sales BV) CA 8-Feb-2000
The court considered a contract requiring access to be given to accounts records for auditing licence fees. . .
Cited – SSQ Europe SA v Johann and Backes OHG 2002
Extension of time to challenge court’s jurisdiction. . .
Cited – BFC Aircraft Sales and Leasing Ltd v Ages Group Plc 14-Dec-2001
The court will assume that by expressly choosing English law in a contract, the parties were indicating at least a preference to litigate in England: ‘The choice of the applicable law is, clearly, not so strong a feature as a choice of jurisdiction . .
Cited – USF Ltd v Aqua Technology Hanson NV/SA 30-Jan-2001
Extension of time to challenge jurisdiction of the court. . .
Cited – Seaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran HL 15-Oct-1993
A plaintiff must show that there is a ‘serious issue for trial’ to support and justify an application for overseas service. The standard of proof in respect of the cause of action relied on is whether, on the evidence, there was a serious question . .
Cited – Canada Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg and others (2) CA 29-Oct-1997
The court looked at questions relating to domicile and jurisdiction; standard of proof, date to be determined and duties before service.
Held: The court is endeavouring to find an imprecise concept which reflects that the plaintiff must . .
Cited – Carvill America Incorporated and Another v Camperdown UK Ltd. and others CA 27-May-2005
The claimant must bring evidence to establish that he has a cause of action which can be tried is that his claim has ‘a reasonable prospect of success,’ and this threshold is the same as if the claimant were resisting an application by the defendant . .
Cited – Burns-Anderson Independent Network Plc v Francis Henry Wheeler 2005
(Bristol Mercantile Court) The power to extend time to challenge the court’s jurisdiction in a matter was assumed to exist. . .
Cited – Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada HL 1986
Forum Non Conveniens Restated
The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum.
Held: ‘In the . .
Cited – Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2) HL 12-Oct-2000
The plaintiffs alleged the involvement of the defendant in a conspiracy to defraud. He had been domiciled in England, but had moved to Germany. He denied that the UK court had jurisdiction. The court of appeal said that jurisdiction was determined . .
Cited – Coast Lines Ltd v Hudig and Veder Chartering NV 1971
Parties who contract to give the UK courts jurisdiction must be taken at least to have wanted a case to be heard by the UK courts. The fact that the foreign forum, notwithstanding the express choice of English law, may not apply English law, and may . .
Cited – Nima SARL v The Deves Insurance Public Company Ltd; The Prestrioka CA 30-Jul-2002
A marine insurance contract was entered into for goods to be transported between two ports. A side note provided that cover was to start from the time the goods left the warehouse. The Act provided that the insurance was void from the time such a . .
Cited – BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt 1976
The fact that the contract was governed by English law was the predominating factor to be borne in mind when deciding jurisdiction.
The court should be careful before describing as non-disclosure as material not included in an affidavit in . .
Cited – BP Exploration Operating Co Ltd v Chevron Transport (Scotland) HL 18-Oct-2001
A ship owned by the defenders caused substantial damage whilst moored at the claimant’s docks. The claim was made against different members of the defendants as they asserted and denied responsibility. The last company asserted that the claim was . .
Cited – Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co HL 1983
A claimant must show good reason why service on a foreign defendant should be permitted. This head of jurisdiction was an exorbitant jurisdiction, one which, under general English conflict rules, an English court would not recognise as possessed by . .
Cited – Ilyssia Compania Naviera SA v Bamaodah ‘The Elli 2’ CA 1985
May LJ considered the creation of a contract by implication, saying: ‘no such contract should be implied on the facts of any given case unless it is necessary to do so: necessary, that is to say, in order to give business reality to a transaction . .
Cited – MacSteel Commercial Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Thermasteel V (Canada) Inc CA 1996
The South African and Canadian parties had contracted subject to the law of England. The Canadian company said that England remained inappropriate as the choice of forum.
Held: Jurisdiction was declined.
The distinction between the . .
Cited – du Pont du Nemours v Agnew CA 1987
An application was made to injunct the commencement of proceedings in England.
Held: The request failed. The court was asked whether the English claimants had shown a good argument for invoking the jurisdiction of the English court against . .
Cited – Mitsubishi Corp v Alafouzos 1988
Elements of English public policy may determine that an English Court is the appropriate forum to hear a case. Steyn J said: ‘one must keep constantly in mind that one is dealing with a head of public policy, which requires the Court to proceed with . .
Cited – Seashell Shipping Corporation v Mutualidad de Seguros del Instituto Nacional de Industria (‘The Magnum’ ex ‘Tarraco Augusta’) CA 1989
Where the decision as to forum depends upon the construction of the document or documents in one language and the rival courts are, on the one hand, courts whose native language is that of the document and on the other hand, courts whose native . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sawyer v Atari Interactive Inc CA 2-Mar-2007
The claimant designed games software and complained of infringements by the defendant of licensing agreements by failing to allow audits as required.
Held: The defendant should be allowed to be heard on the standard practices for management of . .
Cited – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Cited – Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp v Kuwait Insurance Co HL 1983
A claimant must show good reason why service on a foreign defendant should be permitted. This head of jurisdiction was an exorbitant jurisdiction, one which, under general English conflict rules, an English court would not recognise as possessed by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Licensing, Jurisdiction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234716

Chaffeur Bikes Ltd v Leeds City Council: QBD 20 Oct 2005

The claimant sought a license to allow him to use motor-bikes as private hire vehicles. The council had refused a licence saying that they were not safe. He claimed that since they were safe to be on the road, they should be licensed.
Held: The Act imposed two requirements for safety. The vehicle itself should be safe, and it should in addition be safe to be used as a private hire vehicle.

Judges:

Keene LJ, Poole J

Citations:

Times 12-Oct-2005, [2005] EWHC 2369 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1984 48

Licensing, Road Traffic

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231463

Misbehavin’ Ltd, Re an Application for Judicial Review: CANI 15 Sep 2005

Appeal from a decision dismissing the appellant’s application for judicial review of Belfast City Council’s refusal to grant the appellant’s application for a sex establishment licence in respect of premises at Gresham Street, Belfast.

Citations:

[2005] NICA 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – Misbehavin’ Ltd, Re Application for Judicial Review QBNI 24-Sep-2004
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin’ Ltd HL 25-Apr-2007
Belfast had failed to license sex shops. The company sought review of the decision not to grant a licence.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The refusal was not a denial of the company’s human rights: ‘If article 10 and article 1 of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.230224

Wildman, Regina (on the Application of) v The Office of Communications: Admn 25 Jul 2005

The claimant sought judicial review of an order quashing the decision of the Office of Communications to refuse a radio licence.
Held: The court should be very cautious before quashing a decision as to the allocation of broadcasting licences. It was OfCom to which the responsibility for making such a decision had been given. Its decision should be done only if it was shown that real unfairness or a significant error of law.

Judges:

Stanley Burnton J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1573 (Admin), Times 28-Sep-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Broadcasting Act 1990 104, European Convention on Human Rights 810

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Department of Transport, ex parte Presvac Engineering Ltd 1992
In a judicial review application, the question of standing falls to be considered again in deciding whether the Court should exercise its discretion to grant relief: ‘The court must . . review at [the substantive] stage the question of sufficiency . .
Cited – Regina (TSW Broadcasting Ltd) v Independent Television Commission HL 1994
Lord Templeman said: ‘Judicial review does not issue merely because a decision maker has made a mistake and it is not permissible to probe the advice received by the decision maker or to require particulars or administer interrogatories or, as Mr . .
Cited – E v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc CA 2-Feb-2004
The court was asked as to the extent of the power of the IAT and Court of Appeal to reconsider a decision which it later appeared was based upon an error of fact, and the extent to which new evidence to demonstrate such an error could be admitted. . .
Cited – Regina v Director General of Telecommunications, Ex P Cellcom Ltd and others QBD 7-Dec-1998
The Director General of Telecommunications can quite properly use his powers and discretion to ensure competition in telecommunications by the granting and withholding of licences. He may take account of economic factors in making such a decision. . .
Cited – Demuth v Switzerland ECHR 5-Nov-2002
The court considered the licensing system for television broadcasts in Switzerland and concluded that it was capable of contributing to the quality and balance of programmes through the powers conferred on the government. It was therefore consistent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Licensing, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229065

Gough v Bristol Licensing Justices: QBD 12 Apr 2002

The applicant sought a special order of exemption to allow him to open his public house for customers to watch the world cup football matches. Previous case law suggested that such events were not ‘special events’ within the Act so as to allow such orders.
Held: Televised sport had now become a major part of public, and pub life, and the World Cup was a major sporting event. There would undoubtedly be local celebration and enjoyment of the event, even if it was not held locally. The magistrates had a discretion to grant an order, and one was now granted.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice and Mr Justice Harrison

Citations:

Times 01-May-2002

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 74(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Berwyn Justices, Ex parte Edwards 1980
. .
Cited – Regina v Leicester Justices, Ex parte Watchorn 1978
. .
Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Ex parte Maynard 1982
The licensee sought a special hours certificate for a boxing match being held in the US.
Held: The word ‘special’ was to be used in its ordinary sense, and refer to some local or national event with some connection with those attending the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.170171

We Love Hackney Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hackney: Admn 17 Apr 2019

Judicial review of the decision of the defendant to adopt a revised statement of licensing policy making changes to Special Policy Areas within the Borough and changed the core hours policy for licensed premises within the Borough.

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1007 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.636106

Cummings, Regina (on the Application of) v Cardiff County Council: CA 11 Jul 2005

Appeal against a decision refusing Mr Cummings judicial review of a decision of the Cardiff County Council to remove the restriction on the number of hackney carriage licences in Cardiff.

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton Master of the Rolls (Lord Phillips) Lord Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1061

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal From – Cummings v Cardiff County Council Admn 27-Oct-2004
Licensing of taxis – removal of limit on hackney carriage licences destroying value of existing licences. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.229727

Brentwood Borough Council v Gladen: Admn 28 Oct 2004

The defendant taxi operator was telephoned, and cabs were booked, and those bookings were fulfilled by providing licensed hackney carriages with licensed hackney carriage drivers. He was accused of knowingly operating the vehicles as private hire vehicles in a controlled district without a current operator’s licence under section 55 of the 1976 Act contrary to section 46(1)(d) and (2). The council appealed by way of case stated dismissal of their prosecutions under the Act of Mr Gladen for providing pre-booked private hire. The prosecution claimed he needed a license as a private hire operator in addition to the license he had under the 1847 Act.
Held: The District Judge had been correct. Section 46(1)(d) is not breached where a licensed hackney carriage and a licensed hackney carriage driver is provided for the relevant conveyance of a passenger, albeit it is provided through an operator. In those circumstances, an operator’s licence under section 55 of the Act is not appropriate, since that section does not cover hackney carriages.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2500 (Admin), Times 01-Nov-2004, [2005] RTR 12

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 55, Town Police Clauses Act 1847

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Heath 16-Oct-2000
It was submitted that the schemes relating to hackney carriages and private hire vehicles were two distinct schemes, and that the issues in that case had arisen because the Council had fallen into the trap of seeking to apply private hire statutory . .
Cited – Benson v Boyce Admn 20-Jan-1997
‘Looking at the other subsections of section 46, the first applies to a proprietor of a vehicle who uses or permits it to be used in a controlled district as a private hire vehicle without having a licence for it as such under section 48. The phrase . .

Cited by:

Cited – Newcastle City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Berwick-Upon-Tweed Borough Council and others Admn 5-Nov-2008
The applicant council complained that the respondent council was issuing a disproportionately high number of taxi licences, believing that it should only refuse a licence where the driver appeared to be unfit.
Held: The purpose of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Transport

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219259

Cummings v Cardiff County Council: Admn 27 Oct 2004

Licensing of taxis – removal of limit on hackney carriage licences destroying value of existing licences.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2295 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal From – Cummings, Regina (on the Application of) v Cardiff County Council CA 11-Jul-2005
Appeal against a decision refusing Mr Cummings judicial review of a decision of the Cardiff County Council to remove the restriction on the number of hackney carriage licences in Cardiff. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.218857

Regina v Warrington Crown Court Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary, Ex Parte RBNB (A Company): HL 20 Jun 2002

The company refused to disclose the identity of its shareholders, when it applied for an alcohol license. The magistrates refused a licence it on the basis that the information was needed to assess the fitness of the company to hold the licence. The Crown Court refused the licence, but it was then granted on appeal. The police appealed.
Held: The shares were held through companies in such a way that the identity of the shareholders was not publicly ascertainable, and the court could not be sure that those controlling the company were appropriate. The appeal was refused. There was no extraneous reason to doubt the fitness of the proposed licensee. The term ‘a fit and proper person’ is to be construed according to the context. Questions about the eventual ownership of the owner were a distraction from the proposed licensee’s own fitness.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Mustill, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

Times 21-Jun-2002, Times 01-Aug-2002, [2002] UKHL 24, (2003) 167 JPN 31, [2002] BCC 697, [2002] NPC 85, [2002] 1 WLR 1954, [2002] 4 All ER 131, (2003) 167 JP 6

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company, Licensing, Magistrates

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.174014

Dinev and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v City of Westminster Council: CA 25 Jan 2001

Renewed application for permission to appeal against an order dismissing the applicants’ judicial review challenge to the decision to introduce a temporary licensing scheme for portrait artists in Leicester Square

Judges:

Simon Brown VP CA LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 80

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217928

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: CA 25 Jun 2004

The applicant sought special removal of a justices on-licence from former premises to its new premises.
Held: The special removal procedure was limited to circumstances of urgency. The applicant had to show that the circumstances fell within the section, and that the premises were about to be pulled down or occupied. The section did not mention an imminent compulsory purchase order, and nor did the acquisition of the prooperty under a CPO amount to occupation where the property remained vacant. The magistrates had to be kept informed of the exact suituation at the date of the application.

Judges:

Sir Martin Nourse Kay, Lord Justice Kay Lord Justice Jacob

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 767, Times 09-Jul-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Harris v Birkenhead Corporation CA 12-Nov-1975
A four year old child had fallen from a second-story window in a derelict house owned by the defendant, and suffered serious injury. The house and others had been purchased by compulsion for intended clearance. The Corporation appealed against a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another HL 15-Feb-2006
Licensees appealed against the grant of judicial review of decisions granting special removal of old on-licences for premises. The grant had been challenged on the basis that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to make the award because the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198409

West End Street Traders’ Association and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v City of Westminster: Admn 21 May 2004

The respondent regulated street trading within its area by licenses issued under the Act. The claimants challenged substantial increases in the licence fees saying there had been insufficient consultation. The system was running at a net cost.
Held: The authority was obliged to seek to cover its costs. It was within the discretion of the authority to make a general charge rather than to charge for services according to use.

Judges:

Leveson J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1167 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

City of Westminster Act 1999 22(11)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Manchester City Council ex parte King QBD 1991
When setting licence fees for local traders, the authority had set them at a commercial rate. ‘the judgment of what was a reasonable fee ‘for the purpose of recouping in whole or in part the cots of operating the street trading scheme’ was for . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Tower Hamlets ex parte Tower Hamlets Combined Traders Association QBD 19-Jul-1993
The court discussed the way in which local authorities should conduct their activities under the section: ‘[T]he budgetary exercise required of a local authority under section 32 is a part of its larger duty to administer its funds so as to protect . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.197070

Kapper: ECJ 29 Apr 2004

(Judgment) Directive 91/439/EEC – Mutual recognition of driving licences – Residence requirement – Article 8(4) – Effects of withdrawal or cancellation of a previous driving licence – Recognition of a new driving licence issued by another Member State

Citations:

C-476/01, [2004] EUECJ C-476/01, [2004] ECR I-5205

Links:

Bailii

Road Traffic, Licensing

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196660

Norwich Crown Court and others v Luminar Leisure: CA 7 Apr 2004

Objections were raised to the grant of a special hours licence.
Held: The premises had been adapted to provide for music and dancing and for eating. Four principles were identified: The intended use is that of the licensee, not his customers; that some customers might only drink would not defeat an application; the use to which it was ancillary was the whole day’s hours, because the certificate stood in the place of the ordinary license; and it was not to be used to create a late night pub. The license stood.

Judges:

Peter Gibson, Laws, Longmore LJJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 281, Times 23-Apr-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 77

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Luminar Leisure Ltd v Norwich Crown Court Admn 3-Oct-2003
The claimant challenged a grant on appeal of a Supper Hours Certificate. It had been refused initially on the ground that in reality it was sought merely to secure extended licensing hours.
Held: The purpose of the licensee must be that the . .
Cited – Richards v Bloxham (Binks) QBD 1968
The applicant appealed refusal by magistrates to revoke a Supper Hours Certificate.
Held: Describing section 77, ‘Pausing there, I should have thought as a matter of ordinary language that that is enabling justices to grant a special hours . .
Cited – Regina v Stafford Crown Court ex parte Shipley CA 12-Dec-1997
The issue of a special hours certificate overrode the normal license during the entire period of the special hours granted; The Justices might also state the starting time for the special hours certificate. ‘at all times when the special hours . .
Cited – Northern Leisure Plc v Schofield and Baxter QBD 3-Aug-2000
The case concerned a night club. The principal question was whether it was necessary, for a special Hours Certificate (SHC) to be granted, for music and dancing and substantial refreshment to be provided at the same time throughout the permitted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195638

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others: Admn 15 Mar 2004

Objection was made to the removal of an old on-license by the magistrates.
Held: The justices had had no jurisdiction under section 15 because, at the time the application came before the justices, the premises of Mim’s Bar were not ‘occupied’ or about to be ‘occupied’ for a ‘public purpose’ within the meaning of section 15(1)(a).

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 446 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others Admn 31-Jul-2003
The claimants objected to a forced transfer of an unused justices on-line for the benefit of the licencee applicants. The licensees had first been refused a licence for certain premises, but then requested and were given transfer of an obsolete . .

Cited by:

At first instnce – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another HL 15-Feb-2006
Licensees appealed against the grant of judicial review of decisions granting special removal of old on-licences for premises. The grant had been challenged on the basis that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to make the award because the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Human Rights

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.194699

Vehicle and Operator Services Agency v George Jenkins Transport Ltd: Admn 20 Nov 2003

The prosecutor Agency appealed by way of case stated against a decision refusing to allow them to admit documentary evidence.
Held: The appeal was dismissed, but the court took the opportunity to say that a case stated did not need as in this case to set out the full details of some 200 informations which did not affect the ruling. A case stated should set out the facts as found or accepted. The magistrates should if necessary seek assistance from the advocates in drafting the agreed statement of facts, and setting out any areas of disagreement.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, MacKay J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2879 (Admin), Times 05-Dec-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 24

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Foxley CACD 9-Feb-1995
Written statements can be admissible at trial with the protections given by the section without being supported by oral evidence. An inference of the personal knowledge of the maker of statement is permissible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Licensing, Transport, Magistrates

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188529

Hampshire County Council v Beer (T/A Hammer Trout Farm); Regina (Beer) v Hampshire Farmers’ Market Ltd: CA 21 Jul 2003

The applicant had been refused a licence to operate within the farmer’s market. It sought judicial review of the rejection, but the respondent argued that it was a private company not susceptible to review.
Held: The decisions of the Farmers Market were open to judicial review. The farmers markets were held on publicly owned land to which the public had access, the company was set up by the council using statutory powers and it stepped into the council’s shoes performing the same functions as the council had previously performed. From the start the council assisted the company by providing facilities and finance. The company was established to take over on a non profit basis the running of markets previously operated by the council in the exercise of its statutory power in what was considered to be the public interest. In that light, the company having taken over a public function, retained a sufficient element of the exercise of a public function to make its decisions susceptible to judicial review: ‘unless the source of power clearly provides the answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law.’
Dyson LJ said: ‘It seems to me that the law has now been developed to the point where, unless the source of power clearly provides an answer, the question whether the decision of a body is amenable to judicial review requires a careful consideration of the nature of the power and function that has been exercised to see whether the decision has a sufficient public element, flavour or character to bring it within the purview of public law. It may be said with some justification that this criterion for amenability is very broad, not to say question-begging. But it provides the framework for the investigation that has to be conducted. There is a growing body of case law in which the question of amenability to judicial review has been considered. From these cases it is possible to identify a number of features which point towards the presence or absence of the requisite public law element’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson, Lord Justice Longmore and Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1056, Times 25-Aug-2003, [2004] 1 WLR 233

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Take-over Panel, ex parte Datafin PLC CA 1986
Amenability to judicial review
The issue of amenability to judicial review often requires an examination of the nature of the power under challenge as well as its source: ‘In all the reports it is possible to find enumerations of factors giving rise to the jurisdiction [of . .
Cited – Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue CA 27-Apr-2001
The defendant resisted accelerated possession proceedings brought for rent arrears under his assured shorthold tenancy, by a private housing association who was a successor to a public authority.
Held: Once the human rights issue was raised, . .
Cited – Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation CA 21-Mar-2002
The appellants appealed rejection of their application for judicial review. They were long term residents in a nursing home, which the respondents had decided to close.
Held: Though the respondent did exercise some public functions, and its . .
Cited – Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Cited – Regina v HM Treasury, Ex Parte University of Cambridge ECJ 3-Oct-2000
When considering public law governed the procedural requirements for procurement contracts, the court had to consider whether body was financed ‘for the most part’ by public funds. The words referred to the majority of income, and the calculations . .
Cited – Regina v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Hook CA 1976
The applicant applied to have quashed the decision of the local council to exclude him from trading in the market and to revoke his right to have a stall.
Held: He succeeded on the grounds that the decision had been taken in breach of the . .
Cited – Regina v Basildon District Council, ex parte Brown CA 1981
The status of a market was not relevant to the crucial question whether the stallholder’s licence had been validly terminated. The exercise of the powers by the local authority must be governed by the same principles whether in relation to a . .
Cited – Regina v Wear Valley District Council, ex p Binks 1985
The applicant operated a hot food takeaway caravan from a market place. She had no written licence, operating under an informal arrangement with the local authority. Her rights were terminated without notice.
Held: The decision was quashed. It . .
Cited – Regina v Durham County Council, ex parte Robinson 31-Jan-1992
The applicant sought to challenge the decision of the local authority to terminate his stallholder’s licence. The parties had agreed that a sufficient element of public law was involved to give the court jurisdiction to review the decision.
Cited – Regina v Birmingham City Council, ex parte Dredger QBD 22-Jan-1993
The local authority, operators of the market, increased the rents payable by the tenants. The tenants sought a review of the decision.
Held: The act was that of a public authority and was subject to judicial review. The market stall-holders . .
Distinguished – Regina v Servite Houses, London Borough of Wandsworth Council ex parte Louisa Laura Goldsmith, By Her Daughter and Litigation Friend Linda Goldsmith v Florence Nellie Chatting By Her Niece and Litigation Friend Marlene Turner Admn 12-May-2000
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Boyle, Regina (On the Application of) v Haverhill Pub Watch and Others Admn 8-Oct-2009
The claimant had been banned from public houses under the Haverhill Pub Watch scheme. He now sought judicial review of a decision to extend his ban for a further two years. The Scheme argued that it was not a body amenable to judicial review, and . .
Cited – London Borough of Lewisham and Others), Regina (on The Application of) v Assessment and Qualifications Alliance and Others Admn 13-Feb-2013
Judicial review was sought of the changes to the marking systems for GCSE English in 2012.
Held: The claim failed. Though properly brought, the failure was in the underlying structue of the qualification, and not in the respondent’s attempts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184822

Regina (Mayer Parry Recycling Ltd) v Environment Agency and Another; Corus (UK) Ltd and Another, Interveners: ECJ 19 Jun 2003

The applicants took in ferrous scrap, sorted and cut it, selling it on to processors who would use the material in a second stage recycling process to produce ingots. The claimed entitlement to credit under the regulations.
Held: The second stage was a recycling process, but the first was not. A reprocessor was someone carrying out the process of recovery or recycling. ‘Recycling’ means reprocessing in a production process of the waste materials for the original purpose or for other purposes including organic recycling, but excluding energy recovery’. The provision of the 94 Directive were lex specialis as regards the earlier Directive, and it related to packaging waste only. Such packaging waste had to be worked to enable new material or product to be made from it with characteristics comparable to those of the material from which it was derived.
Advocate General Alber said: ‘The Court of Justice has thus refused to make classification of a material as waste dependent on its economic value, its fitness for reuse . . or the environmental hazards posed by it . . The holder’s conduct can be appraised only with regard to his intentions, a fact which causes the body applying the law considerable difficulties.
The Court of Justice solves this problem by inferring an intention to discard the substance from objective indicators; in doing so it has regard both to all the factual circumstances and to the aim of the waste Directive . .”

Judges:

Advocate General Alber

Citations:

C-444/00, Times 14-Jul-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-444/00, [2004] Env LR 6, [2004] 1 WLR 2644

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 (1994/1056), Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (1997 No 648), Council Directive 94/96/EC of December 20 1994 on packaging and packaging waste regulations

Cited by:

Cited – Ezeemo and Others v Regina CACD 16-Oct-2012
The defendants had been charged with offences relating to their intended transporting of waste materials to Nigeria. They appealed, complaining that the judge had directed that the offence under regulation 23 was an offence of strict liability.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment, Licensing

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184550

Leeds City Council v Watkins, Whiteley: ChD 25 Mar 2003

The authority sought to control local unlicensed Sunday markets.
Held: The Acts gave the authority the right to run its own markets, and to license others. That right included in each case the right to prevent others competing within the area designated. An argument that a right to prosecute was a sufficient remedy and excluded a power to prevent a market operating did not work. This was a separate and self contained statutory scheme.
JohnLambert Neither arts 81 and 82 of the Treaty of Rome, nor s. 2 and s. 18 of the Competition Act 1998, prevent local authorities from enforcing their common law and statutory powers to regulate markets.
Part of the defence to a claim by the Council against operators of various car boot sales was that the authority had taken decisions, either on its own or in conjunction with other local councils who belonged to the National Association of British Market Authorities, that might affect trade, either within the UK or between the UK and other EC member states, so as to prevent or distort competition. The judge rejected that argument on the ground that neither the Association nor its member authorities were ‘undertakings’ within the meaning of art 81 EEC or s. 2 of the 1998 Act. Further, even if they had been ‘undertakings’, his lordship found no evidence of an agreement or concerted practice.
Similarly, the sale organisers had alleged that the City Council had abused a dominant position. Again, they failed to persuade his lordship that the Council had occupied a dominant position within the ECJ’s definition in United Brands -v- Commission [1978] ECR 207. The judge found that even if it had been in a dominant position, the Council’s conduct would not have amounted to abuse.
The intriguing aspect of this case is that it was decided entirely on the facts leaving open the possibility tat the arguments could still be good in law.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith

Citations:

Times 09-Apr-2003, [2003] EWHC 598 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

West Yorkshire Act 1980, Leeds Corporation (Consolidation) Act 1905

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180328

Regina (on the Application of Chorion Plc) v Westminster City Council: CA 30 Jul 2002

The judge had awarded the costs of part of an action to one party, and provided that overall the costs were to be assessed if not agreed. The applicant sought to have its costs own assessed.
Held: The order did not differentiate between the different parts on the question of assessment, and it was not possible to assess one part of the costs as opposed to the whole. Such a deferred assessment was different in nature from deciding whether a party would receive all or part of its costs.

Judges:

Pill LJ, Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

Times 21-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1126, [2002] All ER (D) 468, [2002] LLR 624, [2003] CPLR 41

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina (on the Application of Chorion Plc) v Westminster City Council Admn 5-Oct-2001
A licensing policy had been challenged and then amended by the defendant council to meet the claimant’s concerns. Though the remaining issue was as to costs; the judge had to decide whether the challenge had been well founded.
Held: The policy . .
Main Judgment – Chorion Plc v Westminster City Council CA 5-Mar-2002
renewed application for permission to appeal – costs after withdrawal of application for judicial review. . .

Cited by:

Cited – JD Wetherspoon Plc, Regina (on the Application Of) v Guildford Borough Council Admn 11-Apr-2006
The company sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to apply its cumulative impact policy to their application for extended licensing hours.
Held: The company’s application amounted to a material variation of the license, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Licensing

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177476

Reynolds v Brent London Borough Council: CA 4 Dec 2001

When a local authority was considering the fitness of a proposed licensee for the purposes of managing a house in multiple occupation, it was not under an obligation first to consider whether conditions proposed by the manager, would adequately meet any objections. The clause which allowed the court to attach conditions was free standing and separate. The authority was entitled to refuse registration without considering the imposition of restrictions.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Mummery and Lord Justice Buxton

Citations:

Times 18-Dec-2001, Gazette 06-Feb-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1843

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 348

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167111

City of Edinburgh Council v Decision of Scottish Ministers and Co: SCS 24 May 2001

The reporter’s decision that a licensed restaurant constituted ‘similar licensed premises’ to a public house, within the meaning of a policy, was vitiated by her misunderstanding of the policy: the context was one in which a distinction was drawn between public houses, wine bars and the like, on the one hand, and restaurants, on the other.

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 121, 2001 SC 957

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee City Council SC 21-Mar-2012
The company challenged the grant of planning permission for a competitor to open a new supermarket within 800 metres of its own, saying that the Council had failed to apply its own planning policies, which required preference of suitable sites not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.164195

Regina v The Medicines Control Agency, ex parte Smith and Nephew Pharmaceuticals and Primecrown v The Medicines Control Agency: ECJ 12 Nov 1996

ECJ When the competent authority of a Member State concludes that a proprietary medicinal product covered by a marketing authorization in another Member State and a proprietary medicinal product for which it has already issued a marketing authorization are manufactured by independent companies pursuant to agreements concluded with the same licensor and that those two products, although not identical in all respects, have at least been manufactured according to the same formulation and using the same active ingredient and that they also have the same therapeutic effects, it must treat the imported proprietary medicinal product as being covered by the latter marketing authorization unless there are countervailing considerations relating to the effective protection of the life and health of humans. If the public health authorities of the Member State of importation already have in their possession, as a result of an application for a marketing authorization for the proprietary medicinal product in question, all the pharmaceutical particulars relating to that product and considered to be absolutely necessary for the purpose of checking that the product is effective and not harmful, it is clearly unnecessary, in order to protect the health and life of humans, for those authorities to require a second trader who has imported a proprietary medicinal product satisfying the abovementioned criteria to produce these particulars again.
The fact that the grantor of the licences in respect of the two proprietary medicinal products in question is situated outside the European Community is irrelevant.
However, if the competent national authority concludes that the proprietary medicinal product to be imported does not satisfy the abovementioned criteria, a new marketing authorization is required. That authorization can be issued only in accordance with the conditions laid down in Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 65/65 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to proprietary medicinal products, as amended in particular by Directive 87/21. It would, in particular, be contrary to those provisions, which preclude the issue of a marketing authorization unless all the information referred to in Article 4 has been supplied and the tests performed, for the competent authority, in the context of an application for a marketing authorization, to use information supplied by an independent company, without its agreement, in support of an application for a marketing authorization concerning another proprietary medicinal product.
2. The holder of an original marketing authorization issued under the procedure referred to in Directive 65/65 may rely on the provisions of that directive, as amended in particular by Directive 87/21, and specifically on Article 5 thereof, in proceedings before a national court in order to challenge the validity of an authorization issued by the competent national authority on the basis of that directive to one of its competitors for a proprietary medicinal product bearing the same name. The same applies where the authorization, although issued under another procedure laid down at national level, should have been issued on the basis of the directive. Those provisions are sufficiently unconditional and precise for that purpose.

Citations:

C-201/94, [1996] EUECJ C-201/94

Links:

Bailii

European, Licensing

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161393

Quietlynn and Richards v Southend Borough Council: ECJ 11 Jul 1990

Article 30 of the Treaty should be construed as meaning that national provisions prohibiting the sale of lawful sex articles from unlicensed sex establishments do not constitute a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction on imports.
Legislation governing the marketing of certain products which applies without distinction to imported and domestic products and is not intended to regulate trade in goods within the Community has in fact no connection with intra-Community trade provided that the products concerned may be marketed through licensed sex establishments and other channels, that is to say through shops in which sex articles account for only an insignificant proportion of sales and which are therefore not required to be licensed, or by mail order.

Judges:

C N Kakouris P

Citations:

C-23/89, [1990] EUECJ C-23/89

Links:

Bailii

European, Licensing

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160199

Schiller v H M Attorney General for Gibraltar and others: PC 20 Jul 1998

(Gibraltar) Appeal against refusal of judicial review of a decision to refuse his application for a licence to use a fast launch in the territorial waters of Gibraltar.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Lord Irvine of Lairg), Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

[1998] UKPC 31

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Licensing

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159313

Regina v Burt and Adams Ltd: HL 2 Apr 1998

Prizes from gaming machines which were limited to prizes of six pounds per game could be lawfully accumulated by gamers under management rules for larger prizes

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nolan, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

Gazette 07-May-1998, Times 03-Apr-1998, [1998] UKHL 14, [1999] AC 247, [1998] 2 All ER 417, [1998] 2 WLR 725

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Gaming Act 1968 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Burt and Adams Ltd CACD 22-Nov-1995
A right to exchange gaming token was no offence, and nor was allowing the accumulation of prizes. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina v Burt and Adams Ltd CACD 22-Nov-1995
A right to exchange gaming token was no offence, and nor was allowing the accumulation of prizes. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Crime

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.158945

Regina v Blake: CACD 31 Jul 1996

The offence of establishing a radio station without a licence is an absolute offence; no knowledge or mens rea was needed. The presumption that mens rea was required could be rebutted where the offence concerned an issue of public safety.

Citations:

Times 14-Aug-1996, [1996] EWCA Crim 729, [1997] 1 Cr App R 209, [1997] 1 WLR 1167

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gammon v The Attorney-General of Hong Kong PC 1984
(Hong kong) The court considered the need at common law to show mens rea. A Hong Kong Building Ordinance created offences of strict liability in pursuit of public safety which strict liability was calculated to promote.
Held: Lord Scarman . .
Cited – Rudd v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 1985
The court considered the word ‘used’ in the context of a TV Licensing prosecution.
Held: The word ‘use’ is to be interpreted in its natural and ordinary meaning. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Licensing

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.148393

Regina v Liverpool City Council ex parte Barry: CA 21 Mar 2001

The council set up a scheme requiring door security workers to be licensed, as a condition of the grant of entertainment licences. The applicant so worked but was not aware of the scheme. He challenged the introduction of the scheme. It was asserted that there existed no power to attach such conditions to licenses. The ability to charge a fee required statutory authority. There was none, but the remaining parts of the scheme were lawful in pursuing the intention of the Act.

Judges:

The Master Of The Rolls (Lord Phillips) Lord Justice Kennedy And Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 384

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, Local Government Act 1972 111

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Liverpool City Council ex parte Barry Admn 7-Apr-2000
The claimant challenged a scheme for licensing door staff on licensed premises within the city.
Held: Given the length of time for which the scheme had been in place, it was now inappriate to grant relief even if the scheme igt have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147477

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Mercury Personal Communications Limited and Mercury Personal Communications (a Firm Trading As One2One): CA 6 Aug 1999

It was within the Secretary of State’s powers to insist that those mobile phone operators who wished to renew their licences, or bid for further licences, should first, and as a condition of so doing, accept as a precondition for such application, consent to alterations in the terms of their existing licences.

Citations:

Gazette 27-Oct-1999, Times 20-Oct-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 2072, [1999] EWCA Civ 1560

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Wireless Telegraphy Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146987

Regina v Civil Aviation Authority ex parte Jonathan Andrew Edwards: CA 20 Jul 1999

Renewed application for judicial review of a decision of the Civil Aviation Authority to revoke the applicant’s medical certificate, the claimant contending that the CAA ‘have breached its duty to act fairly when considering whether to reinstate his medical certificate as an airline pilot’.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1898

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Air Navigation (No.2) Order 1995, Civil Aviation Act 1982

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Licensing

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146813

Castle Cement v Environment Agency: Admn 22 Mar 2001

The court was asked ‘whether the burning of Cemfuel, as a fuel in the Ribblesdale and Ketton Cement Works operated by the Applicant (Castle), amounts to the burning of ‘hazardous waste’, as the Environment Agency has concluded, or to the burning of a non-waste fuel, as Castle contends.’
Held: Stanley Burnton J said: ‘Whether material is ‘waste’ cannot depend on whether any particular holder of it stores and uses it in an environmentally and otherwise safe manner. Its categorisation should depend on its qualities, not on the qualities of its storage or use. Otherwise the material would be and cease to be waste and come within and outside the controls on hazardous waste as it passed from one holder to another. This would be inconsistent with any rational system of waste control.’ and
‘But for the subsequent judgment of the European Court of Justice in Arco, I should have gratefully adopted Carnwath J’s fine exegesis of the law on this subject. As it is, and regrettably from my point of view, his judgment must now be read subject to the decision of the court in Arco. In particular the last sentence of para 46 of his judgment is inconsistent with paragraphs 94 and 97 of the judgment in Epon.’

Judges:

Stanley Burnton J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 224

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Waste Framework Directive, 75/442/EEC, Council Directive 91/156/EEC, Council Directive 91/692/EEC

Citing:

Limited – Regina v Environment Agency ex parte Dockgrange Limited and Mayer Parry Limited Admn 22-May-1997
The verb ‘discard’ in the Waste Framework Directive has a special and limited meaning which requires the materials to be subjected to a disposal or recovery operation.
Carnwath J said: ‘The general concept is now reasonably clear. The term . .

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 5 of 2000) CACD 6-Jun-2001
Waste products could become ‘controlled waste’ and subject to licensing procedures without there being a recovery or disposal operation being involved. A rendering process produced a condensate which the company wished to spread on farm land without . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Licensing, European

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140294

Eastbourne Borough Council v Charles William Stirling, Robert John Morley: Admn 31 Oct 2000

A taxi operating from private land by a station forecourt, but which could be seen to attract passengers from a nearby busy roadway, was plying for hire in a public street, and accordingly required a private licence under the Act.

Citations:

Times 16-Nov-2000, Gazette 07-Dec-2000, HC Admin 410

Links:

Bailii

Road Traffic, Licensing

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140226

Regina v Liverpool City Council ex parte Barry: Admn 7 Apr 2000

The claimant challenged a scheme for licensing door staff on licensed premises within the city.
Held: Given the length of time for which the scheme had been in place, it was now inappriate to grant relief even if the scheme igt have been unlawful.

Judges:

Maurice Kay J

Citations:

[2000] EWHC Admin 321

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 1, Local Government Act 1972 111

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Liverpool City Council ex parte Barry CA 21-Mar-2001
The council set up a scheme requiring door security workers to be licensed, as a condition of the grant of entertainment licences. The applicant so worked but was not aware of the scheme. He challenged the introduction of the scheme. It was asserted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140135

Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court and Westminster City Council ex parte Rezouali; Westminster City Council v Mendoza: Admn 31 Mar 2000

A local authority served notices on a property owner alleging that they were unlicensed sex establishments. The magistrate confirmed closure. The owner appealed.
Held: The statute gave two grounds for appeal, and an appeal on other grounds was not to be allowed. The fact that a court would have wide discretion on a successful appeal could not widen the permissible grounds. Where one occupier was quite unknown to the authority and so was not served, the authority could not be blamed and the procedure remained effective.

Citations:

Times 12-Apr-2000, [2000] EWHC Admin 318

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

City of Westminster Act 1996

Citing:

Cited – Regina v London Borough of Tower Hamlets ex parte Tower Hamlets Combined Traders Association QBD 19-Jul-1993
The court discussed the way in which local authorities should conduct their activities under the section: ‘[T]he budgetary exercise required of a local authority under section 32 is a part of its larger duty to administer its funds so as to protect . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140132

Regina on Application of Dinev and Others v Westminster City Council: Admn 24 Oct 2000

Street artists had operated in Leicester Square for many years without either licenses or being prosecuted. The respondent introduced a scheme to regulate them, and the applicants sought to challenge it by way of judicial review, alleging a failure to consult, and the obstruction of their rights of establishment under European law.
Held: To the extent that the application form as originally designed was incompatible with the Treaty, it had been amended. That some artists might have originally been deterred from applying was insufficient on its own to justify a review. Some consultation had taken place, and the practical difficulties in a consultation were not insuperable. However the traders were already acting unlawfully, and therefore they could have no legitimate expectation that they should be consulted.

Judges:

Kay J

Citations:

[2000] EWHC Admin 407

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

City of Westminster Act 1999, EC Treaty 43

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gebhard v Consiglio dell’Ordine degli Avvocati e Procuratori di Milano ECJ 30-Nov-1995
Practice by lawyers in other European jurisdictions were governed by the general principles of freedom of establishment under the Treaty: ‘National measures liable to hinder or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by . .
Cited – Regina v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council, ex parte Kayne-Levenson CA 1975
There is a clear public interest in the regulation of street markets. . .
Cited – Regina v Southwark Crown Court ex parte Watts CA 1991
A street market license was properly refused renewal, where the stall was not operated in person by the licensee for a period of four weeks. The Act required his personal supervision of the stall. Such a requirement was not in breach of the . .
Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .
Cited – Regina v Devon County Council Ex Parte Baker, Regina v Durham County Council Ex Parte Broxson CA 22-Feb-1993
A Local Authority considering closing a residential home did not have a duty to notify and consult with each resident who might be affected, but did have a duty to act fairly, and to give sufficiently prominent notice and sufficient time to allow . .
Cited – Regina v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council, ex parte Schemet QBD 1993
The court considered the withdrawal of a policy whereby the local authority paid travelling expenses for the attendance of pupils at denominational schools outside the area.
Held: Relief was granted. The authority should have consulted those . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Local Government, European

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.140223

Regina v Stafford Crown Court ex parte Wilf Gilbert (Staffs) Limited: Admn 22 Feb 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 167

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Perinpanathan, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court and Another CA 4-Feb-2010
The appellant’s daughter had been stopped entering the country with andpound;150,000 in cash. The police sought an order for its forfeiture, suspecting a link with terrorism. The magistrates found no evidence of such, and declined to make the order, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Costs

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139431

Westminster City Council and Blenheim Leisure (Restaurants) Limited and Simon Philip Langer and Carlos Guiseppe Luigi Cura: Admn 12 Feb 1999

For an owner of licensed premises to be liable for failing to maintain good order because of offers of sexual services being made from the premises, it was necessary to show that the licensee had knowledge of the fact that such offers were being made.

Citations:

Times 24-Feb-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 135

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

London Government Act 1963

Licensing

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139399

Regina v Methyr Tydfil Crown Court ex parte Chief Constable Dyfed Powys Police: Admn 9 Nov 1998

Where the police had exercised their statutory duty in opposing a transfer of justices licence without being unreasonable or acting in bad faith, they should not be ordered to pay the applicant’s costs after a successful appeal to the Crown Court.
Lightman J said: ‘It seems to me quite clear that on the basis of that guidance if the matter were proceeding before the justices there could be no justification for an order that the police pay the costs of Mrs Witter [she was the licensee in that case]. However, the matter has to be reviewed in the context of an appeal to the Crown Court. The Crown Court’s powers as to the costs are contained in rule 12(2) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 which provides that:
‘the Crown Court may make such order for costs as it thinks just.’
On an appeal to the Crown Court, against the refusal to transfer the justices’ licence, any person who objects to that transfer becomes a Respondent: see section 22(3) and section 201(1) of the Licensing Act 1964. Accordingly on this appeal to the Crown Court the Chief Constable had to be made, and was, a Respondent. The submission made on behalf of the Chief Constable is that the principle laid down in the Totnes case applies equally to a hearing before the Crown Court. That is disputed by counsel for Mrs Witter.
In my view, the position is quite clear: the same principle applies before the Crown Court as before the licensing justices. The language of the relevant rules [is] for all practical purposes identical. This is reinforced by the consideration that the proceedings before the Crown Court take place by way of rehearing. In the same way as the justices need the assistance of the police in respect of the provision of any information which may assist them in deciding whether or not an Applicant is a fit person to hold a licence, the Crown Court requires that assistance. It seems to me that no order can properly be made against the police simply on the basis that costs follow the event. The Crown Court can only make such an order if it can be shown that the police’s position has been totally unreasonable or prompted by some improper motive.’
. . And: ‘where the police have a public duty to afford protection to the public in respect of some particular activity, whether it is firearms or the conduct of licensed premises, if they have relevant information which goes to the fitness of an Applicant, then it is in the public interest, and in pursuance of their public duty, that they make their position clear to the relevant Tribunal, whether it is the licensing justices or the Crown Court. If in so long as they act responsibly in accordance with that duty, then no adverse order for costs can be made against them. It is not a simple case of costs following the event; it must be clear, as I indicated earlier, that the police have acted otherwise than in good faith or have acted utterly unreasonably before they are exposed to an Order for costs.’

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 17-Dec-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 1058

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Totnes Licensing Justices, ex parte Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall QBD 28-May-1990
The court considered the award of costs in a licensing case. Roch J said: ‘There can be no doubt that in civil proceedings between litigants, be it in the High Court or county court, the principle is that costs follow the event. The winning party . .

Cited by:

Cited – Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, Regina (On the Application of) v Coventry Crown Court Admn 6-Jun-2000
The Chief Constable sought judicial review of the award against him of costs after a successful appeal against the revocation of a justices’ on-licence for premises in Coventry. The initial revocation had followed the cautioning of members of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Police

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.139179

Allied Domecq Leisure Limited v Cooper (West Yorkshire Trading Standard Service): Admn 9 Oct 1998

Short measures of beer had been sold. One aspect of the case was the responsibility of the company, which was not the licensee, for the shortcomings of an inadequately trained bar person.
Held: The question did not really arise because of the way the justices decided the case, but the court questioned the concession made before the justices reflecting the conventional view that Goodfellow precluded any prosecution of the owners of the beer which the licensee was selling on the basis that he alone may sell beer. ‘I have been concerned whether it follows from the proposition that only a licensee may sell beer that the company which owns the premises provides the beer and employs the licensee to sell is not equally selling the beer. I have also asked myself whether the decision in Hotchin v Hindmarsh on which the Divisional Court founded in Goodfellow v Johnson and which holds that the forbidden act in this context is the parting with possession and not with title, truly negatives this possibility. If the true position were that a company in the appellant’s position is selling beer through the licensee, then the only relevant question would be under section 34 whether each had exercised due diligence in order to prevent the bar tender giving short measure.’

Judges:

Sedley J

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 936, [1999] JP 163

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Citing:

Explained – Goodfellow v Johnson 1966
The defendant was the manager and licensee of a public house owned by a brewery. When the premises were visited by a sampling officer the gin supplied by the barmaid was adulterated. She was the servant of the brewery, and the magistrates dismissed . .

Cited by:

Cited – Nottingham City Council v Wolverhampton and Dudley Breweries QBD 27-Nov-2003
A pub was found to have been selling beer below the advertised strength. Both licensee and the owner of the pub were prosecuted. The owner now appealed.
Held: The owner was liable. The words of the Act must be given their ordinary and natural . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Licensing

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.139057

Bromsgrove District Council v Michael Richard Powers: Admn 16 Jul 1998

The authority appealed against the magistrates’ decision to renew a private hire operator’s licence against its own wishes. The licensee no longer opertaed any cars under the licence itself but instead all business was conducted under care operated within the licence from a neighbouring authority.

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 755

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 55 46(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Local Government, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138876

Regina v Airport Co-Ordination Limited ex parte Aravco Limited; Dravidian Air Services Limited; Falcon Jet Centre Limited; Gama Aviation Limited; Heathrow Jet Charter Limited; Metro Business Aviation Limited and Siebe Plc: Admn 14 Jul 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 750

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – Regina v Airport Co-Ordination Limited ex parte Aravco Limited; Dravidian Air Services Limited; Falcon Jet Centre Limited; Gama Aviation Limited; Heathrow Jet Charter Limited; Metro Business Aviation Limited and Siebe Plc Admn 14-Jul-1998
. .
Appeal from – Aravco Ltd and Others, Regina (on the application of) v Airport Co-Ordination Ltd CA 23-Jun-1999
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Licensing

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138871

Regina v Cambridge City Council ex parte Simon Lane: Admn 2 Jun 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 596

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Town and Police Clauses Act 1847 38, Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 47

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v Cambridge City Council, Ex Parte Lane CA 3-Sep-1998
A trishaw was properly a form of hackney carriage, not a ‘stage coach,’ and the Local Authority was able to impose conditions upon the licensing of a service, including limiting the number of passengers and so as to ensure safety. A trishaw was a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Cambridge City Council, Ex Parte Lane CA 3-Sep-1998
A trishaw was properly a form of hackney carriage, not a ‘stage coach,’ and the Local Authority was able to impose conditions upon the licensing of a service, including limiting the number of passengers and so as to ensure safety. A trishaw was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138717

Chemische Fabrik Kreussler and Co. Gmbh v Sunstar Deutschland Gmbh: ECJ 6 Sep 2012

ECJ Directive 2001/83/EC – Medicinal products for human use – Article 1(2)(b) – Meaning of ‘medicinal product by function’ – Definition of the term ‘pharmacological action’

Citations:

C-308/11, [2012] EUECJ C-308/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2001/83/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Health Professions, Licensing

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.464421

Regina (Harpers Leisure International Ltd) v Guildford Borough Council: QBD 13 Jul 2009

The claimant wanted to argue that proceedings before the respondent’s licensing sub-committee were an abuse of process. The committee had said it had no jurisdiction to admit such a clam.
Held: Any such power in an administrative tribunal must be given explicitly by whatever statute created it. A power could not be implied by law and were not inherent. Admission of such a power would allow proceedings to be waylaid by what might be a collateral attack.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

Times 14-Aug-2009

Statutes:

Licensing Act 2003 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Natural Justice

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.372845