Regina v West London Licensing Justices, ex parte Davis: QBD 16 Mar 1994

A pronouncement by Justices was of no legal effect, having been made ultra vires, and so no certiorari order was necessary or capable of being made to correct it.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jun-1994, Gazette 30-Mar-1994, Times 16-Mar-1994

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Magistrates, Licensing

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88289

Regina v Medicines Control Agency Ex Parte Pharma Nord Ltd: QBD 11 Jul 1997

A Court reviewing a decision of the Medicines Control Agency does not decide whether the product is a medicine, but whether the decision had been properly reached.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

Times 29-Jul-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 674

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Medicines Control Agency ex parte Pharma Nord Ltd CA 10-Jun-1998
Once the Medicines Control Agency has decided that a product is a medicinal product and licensable as such, the courts should not seek to substitute their own judgment. Residuary discretion for declaration not used. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Licensing, Administrative

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.87315

Nottingham City Council v Farooq: QBD 21 Oct 1998

Where an applicant for a taxi licence had recklessly failed to mention a conviction for dishonesty, the magistrates were unable to set aside the Department of Transport Circular and disregard it. The decision was one no reasonable court could reach.

Citations:

Times 28-Oct-1998, Gazette 25-Nov-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 991

Links:

Bailii

Licensing

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84373

Dittah and Another v Phillipps: QBD 1 Mar 1993

Limits on operation of taxis. A taxi license authorised a taxi to operate within the district to which it related and not beyond. To operate within another district would require a license from that district.

Citations:

Ind Summary 01-Mar-1993

Statutes:

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

Road Traffic, Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80067

Bradford City Metropolitan District Council v Booth: QBD 10 May 2000

The local authority had refused to renew a private hire vehicle licence. That refusal was successfully challenged, and the magistrates had awarded costs on the basis that they should follow the event. The authority appealed.
Held: The discretion given to magistrates to award such costs as it feels are just and reasonable does not mean that costs should always and normally follow the event. An authority with a duty to make decisions which suffered a successful challenge to that decision, but where the fault in the decision fell short of being unreasonable, dishonest, or improper, should not normally be ordered to pay the costs. The financial effect on the parties should be assessed, but such challenges are part of the expense of running a business. Section 64 was concerned with both liability for costs and their amount. The only statutory restriction on the power of the magistrates was that they could not make an order for costs against a successful party.
Bingham CJ said: ‘The issue in this appeal by case stated is whether justices erred in the exercise of their discretion by awarding costs against a local authority on a successful complaint against a vehicle licensing decision of the local authority when the local authority had not, in making the decision appealed against, acted unreasonably or in bad faith.’
Later he continued ‘It seems to me that the justices in this case misdirected themselves, first, in relying on a principle that costs should follow the event, that misdirection being compounded by their view that the reference in section 64 to the order being just and reasonable applied to quantum only. On the other hand, in my judgment the submissions made by Mr Blair-Gould on behalf of the local authority go too far the other way since to give effect to the principle for which he contends would deprive the justices of any discretion to view the case in the round which is in my judgment what section 64 intends.
I would accordingly hold that the proper approach to questions of this kind can for convenience be summarised is three propositions:
1. Section 64(1) confers a discretion upon a magistrates’ court to make such order as to costs as it thinks just and reasonable. That provision applies both to the quantum of the costs (if any) to be paid, but also as to the party (if any) which should pay them.
2. What the court will think just and reasonable will depend on all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case before the court. The court may think it just and reasonable that costs should follow the event, but need not think so in all cases covered by the subsection.
3. Where a complainant has successfully challenged before justices an administrative decision made by a police or regulatory authority acting honestly, reasonably, properly and on grounds that reasonably appeared to be sound, in exercise of its public duty, the court should consider, in addition to any other relevant fact or circumstances, both (i) the financial prejudice to the particular complainant in the particular circumstances if an order for costs is not made in his favour; and (ii) the need to encourage public authorities to make and stand by honest, reasonable and apparently sound administrative decisions made in the public interest without fear of exposure to undue financial prejudice if the decision is successfully challenged.’

Judges:

Silber J, Lord Bingham of Cornhill

Citations:

Times 31-May-2000, (2000) COD 338, (2000) 164 JP 485

Statutes:

Magistrates Courts Act 1980 64(1), Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 62(1)(b)

Citing:

CitedRegina v Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court, ex parte Chief Constable Dyfed Powys Police QBD 9-Nov-1998
The Chief Constable, on good grounds, objected to the transfer of a justices’ on-licence to a Mrs W. Mrs W appealed and the Chief Constable, having objected to the transfer, became a respondent. On the appeal Mrs W contended that, since the conduct . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedChief Constable of Derbyshire v Goodman and Newton Admn 2-Apr-1998
Firearms licences were granted to the two respondents, but then revoked by the Chief Constable. They appealed to the Crown Court and their appeal was allowed. The judge, however, ordered the Chief Constable to pay the costs of the two respondents, . .

Cited by:

CitedBaxendale-Walker v The Law Society Admn 30-Mar-2006
The solicitor appealed being struck off. He had given a character reference in circumstances where he did not have justification for the assessment.
Held: ‘The appellant knew that Barclays Bank trusted him to provide a truthful reference. . .
CitedCambridge City Council v Alex Nestling Ltd QBD 17-May-2006
The council appealed an award of costs against it. The respondent had appealed against a refusal by the council to vary a premises licence for a public house with partial success, and the magistrates had awarded the respondent half its costs.
CitedMastercard UK Members Forum Ltd Mastercard International Inc CAT 28-Jul-2006
. .
CitedPerinpanathan, 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.

Magistrates, Local Government, Costs, Licensing

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78542

Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Quietlynn Ltd: 1985

The court held that on the failure of an application for a licence for a sex establishment, that part of the licence fee paid which related to the management of the supervisory regime rather than the cost of administering the application alone should be repaid. The fee set by the council could reflect not only the processing of applications but ‘inspecting premises after the grant of licences and for what might be called vigilant policing . . in order to detect and prosecute those who operated sex establishments without licences’.

Judges:

Forbes J

Citations:

[1985] 83 LGR 461

Cited by:

CitedAylesbury Vale District Council, Regina (on The Application of) v Call A Cab Ltd Admn 12-Nov-2013
The council appealed against dismissal of its prosecution of the respondent, alleging the operation of a private hire vehicle without having a current licence, ‘in a controlled district’. The respondent had denied that the necessary resolution had . .
CitedHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others v Westminster City Council Admn 16-May-2012
The applicant had sought a license for a sex establishment. He paid the (substantial) fee, but complained that the Council had not as required, resolved to set the fee, and that in any event, the sum did not reflect the cost of administering the . .
CitedHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster CA 24-May-2013
The claimant had submitted an application for a licence to operate a sex shop. On its failure it sought repayment of that part of the fee which related to the costs of supervising the system, rather than the costs of dealing with the application. It . .
CitedHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 29-Apr-2015
The parties disputed the returnability of the fees paid on application for a sex establishment licence where the licence was refused. The fee was in part one for the application, and a second and greater element related to the costs of monitoring . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.519015

Ahmed v Leicester City Council: QBD 29 Mar 2000

A person carried on a food business even though he might be excluded from the premises, for example, by a partner. It was necessary to read the words of a provision carefully where criminal liability attached, but it was also intended to ensure that responsibility was not evaded by pretending that others ran the business. The proprietor was the person carrying on the business whether or not he was actually the owner.

Citations:

Times 29-Mar-2000

Statutes:

Food Safety Act 1990 1(3), Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 (1995 No 1763)

Licensing, Crime

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77679

Cambridge City Council v Alex Nestling Ltd: QBD 17 May 2006

The council appealed an award of costs against it. The respondent had appealed against a refusal by the council to vary a premises licence for a public house with partial success, and the magistrates had awarded the respondent half its costs.
Held: The appellant had not acted unlawfully, but had acted conscientously and properly. The magistrates had merely reached a different conclusion. The otherwise normal rule that costs follow the event did not apply in such cases.

Judges:

Richards LJ, Toulson J

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-2006

Statutes:

Licensing Act 2003 181

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBradford City Metropolitan District Council v Booth QBD 10-May-2000
The local authority had refused to renew a private hire vehicle licence. That refusal was successfully challenged, and the magistrates had awarded costs on the basis that they should follow the event. The authority appealed.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Magistrates, Costs, Licensing

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.244195

Regina v Medicines Control Agency ex parte Smith and Nephew (Primecrown Ltd intervening): ChD 1999

The court considered liability to third partries under a cross-undertaking given to the court: ‘Whether the recoverable damage is that which is foreseeable by the plaintiff or that which is directly caused by the injunction is not in point. None of the differing views expressed in the cases go so far as to say that the injunctee can claim for damage not suffered by him. Nor do the very words of the undertaking (which is the foundation of the jurisdiction) suggest that he can recover more than that which he has suffered, whether that damage is foreseeable by the injunctor or not. Thus while I have sympathy with Mr Howe’s ‘flexible approach’ I do not think it can go so far as to require the ‘wrongful injunctor’ to pay for damage not suffered by the injunctee at all.
I think this consideration also disposes of Mr Howe’s Linden Gardens point. In that case the House of Lords held that damages for breach of a contract between a developer and a builder should include the damage suffered by the purchaser from the developer. The parties could be treated as having entered into the contract on the basis that the developer would be entitled to enforce its contractual rights on behalf of purchaser who suffered the actual damage. The case depended on the parties having full knowledge that the developer was going to pass the property on to the purchaser, so the builder knew exactly who would be suffered if his work was inadequate. Mr Howe suggested that in this case there is a parallel in that SandN expected to have to pay for trading losses. So they did, but they did not undertake to pay for trading losses, they only undertook to pay for Primecrown’s losses. The analogy with Linden Gardens breaks down.’

Judges:

Jacob J

Citations:

[1999] RPC 705.

Citing:

CitedLinden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd and Others; St. Martins Property Corporation Ltd v Sir Robert McAlpine HL 8-Dec-1993
A contractor had done defective work in breach of a building contract with the developer but the loss was suffered by a third party who had by then purchased the development. The developer recovered the loss suffered by the purchaser.
Held: . .

Cited by:

CitedSmithkline Beecham Plc and others v Apotex Europe Ltd and others PatC 26-Jul-2005
Application was made to join in further parties to support a cross undertaking on being made subject to interim injunctions.
Held: On orders other than asset freezing orders it was not open to the court to impose cross-undertakings against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Licensing

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.231218

Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Mr and Mrs A, YA, ZA, Mr and Mrs B T Authority: QBD 4 Nov 2002

At a fertility clinic, eggs were fertilised with the sperm from the wrong father. It was noticed only because after the birth of the twins, the colour of their skin was different from the mother and putative father.
Held: Difficult issues of medical confidentiality had arisen. The HFEA had conducted a preliminary investigation and imposed certain conditions upon the unit’s licence. Having given a statement of the factual background, the court reserved its’ fuller opinion to a later hearing.

Judges:

Dame Butler-Sloss E, President

Citations:

[2003] 1 FLR 412

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See alsoAHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .

Cited by:

See alsoAHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Licensing

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.190124

Hawkins v Edwards: 1901

Citations:

[1901] 2 KB 169

Statutes:

Town Police Clauses Act 1847 38

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewcastle 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, Road Traffic

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.277888

Hussain v Bradford City Council: QBD 15 Feb 1993

If a complaint was made that a private hire vehicle was acting in contravention of the regulation, requiring it to display the licence plate issued by the local authority, indicating the maximum number of passengers, it was necessary for the prosecution to prove that the vehicle was plying for hire at the time of the alleged offence.

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 48 (6)(b)

Local Government, Licensing, Transport, Crime

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.81565

Muir v Keay: 1875

The defendant ran premises under the name ‘The Cafe. It was discovered to be open through the night, and at the time seventeen women and twenty men were there. They had been sold with cigars, coffee, and ginger beer, and were consuming them.
Held: The house was kept open for public refreshment, resort, and entertainment, and required a licence.

Citations:

(1875) LR 10 QB 594

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.190036

South Kesteven District Council v Mackie and Others: CA 20 Oct 1999

Where animals, which would be counted as dangerous wild animals, were used as performing animals through the summer months, but were kept in settled winter quarters, there was still no need for the keeper to obtain a licence for that keeping.

Citations:

Times 20-Oct-1999

Statutes:

Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Licensing

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.89412

Regina v Chelmsford Crown Court, Ex Parte Farrer: QBD 27 Oct 1999

The licensed shotgun owner kept his guns locked in his mother’s house, and she knew the whereabouts of the key, but was not herself licensed. The police objected to the renewal saying she had access to them and they were not therefore kept securely.
Held: The proper issue was for the potential licence holder to establish that the condition requiring security was satisfied. Case remitted.

Citations:

Gazette 27-Oct-1999, Times 05-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Firearms Rules 1989 (1989 No 854) 4(4)(iv)(a) 3(4)(iv)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Chelmsford Crown Court, Ex Parte Farrer CA 29-Mar-2000
A shotgun owner kept his guns locked in his mother’s house, and she had access to the key. She was not licensed. The police objected to the renewal saying she had access to them, and they were not therefore kept securely.
Held: The proper . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Police

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85173

Jenkins v Essex County Council: FD 25 Nov 1998

An option to take a tenancy of a property was not sufficient to constitute ‘premises’ for the Act. The section presupposed existence of premises which could be inspected and approved, and on which a registration could be based

Citations:

Gazette 25-Nov-1998

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 71(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.82510

Regina v Herrod, ex parte Leeds City District Council: CA 1976

Lord Denning MR described the game bingo: ‘I expect that everybody knows ordinary bingo. It is played at bazaars, sales of work [sic: in [1976] 1 All ER 273, at 279c, the phrase is ‘places of work’], and so forth, for small prizes and is perfectly lawful. Now prize bingo is like ordinary bingo, but played with sophisticated apparatus. Instead of cards with numbers on them, there are dials facing the players. A player puts in a coin (5p for two cards). Thereupon two dials light up showing numbers corresponding to two cards. When the game starts, instead of someone drawing a number out of a hat, a machine throws a ball into the air. A gaily dressed lady plucks one of them and calls out the number. If it is one of the numbers on the dial, the player crosses it out by pulling a cover over it. If he gets all his numbers crossed out correctly before the other players, he gets a prize. This is obviously a lottery or a game of chance, but it is not a ‘gaming machine’ because the element of chance is not ‘provided by means of the machine’ but means of the gay lady: see section 26(2) of the Gaming Act 1968.
In some of these premises there are also some ‘one-armed bandits.’ These are gaming machines. The player puts in a coin. This enables him to pull a handle to forecast a result. Cylinders revolve and give an answer. If he succeeds, he gets the winnings. If he fails, he loses his money. This is undoubtedly a ‘gaming machine’ because the element of chance is provided by means of a machine: see section 26(1) of the Act of 1968 and Capper v. Baldwin [1965] 2 QB 53.’
Lord Denning MR said: ‘If a person comes to the High Court seeking certiorari to quash the decision of the Crown Court – or any other tribunal for that matter-he should act promptly and before the other party has taken any step on the faith of the decision. Else he may find that the High Court will refuse him a remedy. If he has been guilty of any delay at all, it is for him to get over it and not for the other side’.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1976] QB 540

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHM Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc CA 30-Oct-2013
The tax payer had sought repayment of sums of VAT charged to a particular form of gaming, saying that the rules infringed the principles of fiscal neutrality under European law. HMRC now appealed against a finding that the machines were exempt from . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc SC 8-Jul-2015
The question raised by this appeal is whether, during the period 1 October 2002 to 5 December 2005, the takings on a particular category of gaming machines operated by the appellants were subject to VAT. The answer depends on whether the takings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Judicial Review

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.589259

Mixnams Properties Ltd v Chertsey Urban District Council: HL 1965

The local authority was not entitled under the 1960 Act to lay down conditions relating to the licensee’s powers of letting or licensing caravan spaces to its customers. The freedom to contract is a fundamental right, and that if Parliament intends to empower a third party to make conditions which regulate the terms of contracts to be made between others then, even where there is an appeal to a court of law against such conditions, it must do so in clear terms. Viscount Dilhorne: ‘In the present case there appears to me to be a fundamental difference between prescribing what must or must not be done on a site and restricting the site owner’s ordinary freedom to contract with his licensees on matters which do not relate to the manner of use of the site. Conditions can make the site owner responsible for the proper use of the site and it is then for him to make such contracts with his licensees as the general law permits. I can find nothing in the Act of 1960 suggesting any intention to authorise local authorities to go beyond laying down conditions relating to the use of sites, and in my opinion the general words in section 5 cannot be read as entitling them to do so.’

Judges:

Lord Upjohn, Viscount Dilhorne

Citations:

[1965] AC 735

Statutes:

Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedStewart v Perth and Kinross Council HL 1-Apr-2004
The claimant challenged refusal of a licence to sell second hand cars, saying that the licensing requirements imposed were outwith the Act under which they had been made. The licensing scheme imposed additional requirements.
Held: Though a . .
CitedAberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority v Elsick Development Company Limited SC 25-Oct-2017
The court was asked whether, anticipating substantial growth, a local authority had power to attach to permissions for development conditions intended to recover sums for pooled fund for infrastructure development.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
CitedWright, Regina (on The Application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Another SC 20-Nov-2019
W challenged the grant of planning permission for the change of use of agricultural land to allow erection of a wind turbine, saying that the authority had taken into account a promise by the land owner to run the scheme as a community development . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.195471

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 provisions to a hackney carriage situation.
Held: The court agreed and added that the Council might be able to require persons in the position of the applicant in that case, who was licensed under the 1847 Act, to provide information in advance about who would act as a substitute driver in a case of need, and further requiring him or anyone else driving the vehicle to keep a contemporaneous record of who drove which vehicle on what day.

Judges:

Maurice Kay J

Citations:

Unreported, 16 October 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBrentwood 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Road Traffic

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.219864

Regina v Aylesbury Justices ex parte Kitching and GBS Estates Limited: Admn 9 May 1997

The defendant had been convicted of felling trees without a licence. He claimed to have received assurances from the Forestry Commission that he would not be prosecuted. He said the prosecution was an abuse of process. The magistrates held that their jurisdiction on abuse was limited to the fairness of the procedures within the court.

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 452

Statutes:

Forestry Act 1967

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Brentford Justices Ex parte Wong QBD 1981
The defendant had been involved in a traffic accident. Very shortly before the expiry of the six month time limit, the prosecutor issued a careless driving summons apparently in order to preserve the possibility of a prosecution without yet having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Licensing, Magistrates

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.137397

Regina v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council, Ex Parte Earls Court Ltd: QBD 15 Jul 1993

Conditions imposed on a licence under the Act need to be sufficiently precise for applicants to know the obligations imposed upon them. An entertainment licence was unreasonable because its conditions were so obscure in meaning.

Citations:

Times 15-Jul-1993, Independent 07-Sep-1993

Statutes:

London Government Act 1963 P1(2) Sch 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.86804

Gaskin, Regina (on The Application of) v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council and Another: Admn 31 Jul 2018

The court was asked ‘does the owner of a house in multiple occupation (‘HMO’) provide a ‘service’ for the purposes of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (‘the Services Directive’)?’

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1996 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, European, Local Government, Licensing

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621440

Avaaz Foundation, Regina (on The Application of) v The Office of Communications (OFCOM): Admn 27 Jul 2018

The Claimant, the Avaaz Foundation, challenged the decision of the Office of Communications concluding that various allegations of impropriety made against Fox News, a subsidiary of 21st Century Fox Inc, and the evidence in support of those allegations, did not provide a sufficient basis for it to decide in advance of a proposed merger between Fox and Sky plc that Sky, an existing holder of statutory broadcast licences, would not remain fit and proper to hold its licences.

Judges:

Supperstone J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1973 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media, Licensing

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620632

The Gibraltar Betting and Gaming Association v Revenue and Customs Commissioners and another (Government of Gibraltar intervening): ECJ 13 Jun 2017

ECJ Status of Gibraltar – Freedom To Provide Services – Purely Internal Situation – Inadmissibility : Judgment

Citations:

[2017] WLR(D) 166, [2018] 1 CMLR 362, ECLI:EU:C:2017:449, [2017] EUECJ C-591/15, [2017] 4 WLR 67, [2017] 4 WLR 167

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

CitedDepartment of Health and Social Security v Barr and Montrose Holdings (Judgment) ECJ 3-Jul-1991
Europa It follows from Article 1(3) of the Treaty of Accession 1972 in conjunction with Article 158 of the Act of Accession that the jurisdiction in preliminary ruling proceedings conferred on the Court by . .

Cited by:

CitedRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 16-Oct-2019
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Constitutional, Customs and Excise

Updated: 21 April 2022; Ref: scu.588272

Russell v Fulling and Another: ChD 23 Jun 1999

A lottery scheme where participation by means of requesting a scratchcard was not dependent upon making a purchase, but where in practice such a purchase would be felt to be necessary, and would be likely to be made, was unlawful. A contract or loan made in support of such a scheme was unenforceable.

Citations:

Times 23-Jun-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.88933

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.

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 786, [1987] 2 All ER 553, (1987) 85 Cr App R 358

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina 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. . .
CitedFloe Telecom (In Administration) v Office ofCommunications; Vodafone Ltd v T-Mobile (UK) Ltd CAT 19-Nov-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Crime

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.572623

Windsor and Maidenhead Royal Borough Council v Khan (Trading as Top Cabs): QBD 7 May 1993

A cabbie was not operating outside the district of the local authority in which he was licensed to operate, just by advertising outside that district.

Citations:

Times 07-May-1993

Statutes:

Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1976 55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Licensing, Transport

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.90565

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Orange Personal Communications Ltd and Another: Admn 25 Oct 2000

Once rights by way of licences had been granted to a party by virtue of a statute, an amendment to those licences required the Secretary to be explicit with Parliament when altering the licences. The Act provided clear rules for making amendments to licences. The Secretary purported to amend the licences to comply with a European Directive, but the new regulations did not specifically disapply the regime for amending the licences. He should have made it clear in the statutory instrument that the protections were being removed. The regulations made under section 2(2) of the 1972 Act which, if valid, took away valuable rights of Orange which they had enjoyed under the Telecommunications Act 1984, were ultra vires, on the ground that the regulations had failed explicitly to state that rights enjoyed under primary legislation were being taken away.

Citations:

Times 15-Nov-2000, Gazette 23-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Telecommunications Act 1984 12 13 14 15, Telecommunications (Licence Modification) (Standard Schedules) Regulations 1999 (1999 no 2540), European Communities Act 1972 2(2)

Citing:

DistinguishedRegina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Unison 1996
The 1978 Directive required consultation in the case of collective redundancies. Acts had incorrectly incorporated this requirement into English law. The error was corrected in the 1995 Regulations.
Held: Anything is ‘related to’ a Community . .

Cited by:

CitedOakley Inc v Animal Ltd and others PatC 17-Feb-2005
A design for sunglasses was challenged for prior publication. However the law in England differed from that apparently imposed from Europe as to the existence of a 12 month period of grace before applying for registration.
Held: Instruments . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Media, Licensing, Constitutional

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88661

Regina v Gaming Licensing Committee Ex Parte Gala Leisure Ltd: QBD 5 Apr 1996

An application for a bingo hall license can be heard before the hall itself is built. The application is submitted with plans for the building, and if the building does not conform, the license will be invalid.

Judges:

Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-1996

Statutes:

Gaming Act 1968 Sch 2

Licensing

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86682

Regina v Swansea City and Council, Ex Parte Davies: QBD 7 Jul 2000

A hackney council vehicle licence holder had sufficient locus standi as a person aggrieved to appeal against a condition sought to be imposed by the local authority on the licensing of private hire vehicle licenses. Accordingly the Magistrates should hear his complaint and objection. The statute was not narrowly drafted so as to exclude the applicant, although it was not limitless.

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-2000

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 48

Licensing, Road Traffic, Local Government

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85579

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions, Ex Parte Premiere Environmental Ltd: QBD 15 Mar 2000

A waste disposal licence was suspended. The notice provided that the suspension would terminate when the Environment Agency notified the licence holder that it in its view the disposal could safely be continued. The company complained that this was not sufficiently an ‘event’ and that accordingly the notice was ineffective. It was held that the word ‘event’ should not be construed so restrictively. The event should be related to the suspension but not further limited in its nature. The condition was appropriate.

Citations:

Times 15-Mar-2000

Licensing, Environment

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85496

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. Section 3 draws a distinction between ‘means’ (namely how the demand is to be met) and ‘ends’ (the satisfaction of reasonable demands) and that as a matter of language, whilst the Director is expressly made the arbiter of the means to the end, he is not so made the arbiter of the ends. Section 3 recognises that there is a public interest in reasonable demands for telecommunication services being met and the court is intended to be the guardian of that public interest. The exercise in deciding whether a demand is reasonable or not requires no sophisticated exercise necessitating the Director’s experience, expertise and fund of knowledge of this and other markets. The court is well equipped and experienced in deciding questions of reasonableness. The duty of the Director was to exercise his functions in the manner which ‘he considers best calculated to secure . . such telecommunications services as satisfy all reasonable demands for them . . ‘ and ‘Where the Act has conferred the decision making and function on the Director, it is for him, and him alone, to consider the economic arguments, weigh the compelling considerations and arrive at a judgment. The . applicants have no right of appeal; in these judicial review proceedings so long as he directs himself correctly in law, his decision may only be challenged on Wedensbury grounds. The court must be astute to avoid the. danger of substituting its views for the decision maker and of contradicting (as in this case) a conscientious decision maker acting in good faith and with knowledge of all the facts. ‘ and ‘If (as I have stated)the court should be very ‘slow to impugn decisions of fact made by an expert and experienced decision maker, it must surely be even slower to impugn his educated prophesises and predictions for the future.’

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 07-Dec-1998, Gazette 10-Feb-1999, [1999] ECC 314

Statutes:

Telecommunications Act 1984 3

Cited by:

CitedRegina on the Application of T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd, Vodafone Ltd, Orange Personal Communication Services Ltd v The Competition Commission, the Director-General of Telecommunications Admn 27-Jun-2003
The applicants sought to challenge a proposed scheme regulating the prices of telephone calls.
Held: The principle objection was to termination charges, charges on calls between networks. The present charges were greater than the actual cost, . .
CitedOffice of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited CA 19-Feb-2004
The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties . .
CitedWildman, 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Judicial Review, Licensing

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85227

Regina v Inner London Crown Court, Ex Parte Provis: QBD 11 Jul 2000

Where a party intended to object to the grant of a license it was necessary for them to give appropriate notice of that intention before appearing at court to make it. Police objections had been raised only on the date of the application for grant of the licence. Such behaviour could only give rise to expensive adjournments. Notice should be given both to the clerk to the justices and to the party applying.

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-2000

Licensing, Magistrates

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85327

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 licensing hours of an SHC day.
Held: There is no requirement when granting an SHC, that the magistrates need satisfy themselves that the music and dancing would either be continuous throughout the period of the licence or at regular times on each day for which the licences were applied for. The requirement related to the use of the premises by the licensee, not by his customers. ‘ . . . in circumstances in which the justices find that the purpose for which an applicant for an SHC intends persons to resort to the premises is to take advantage of the catering and entertainment facilities to which the sale of liquor is ancillary, music and dancing and substantial refreshment do not have to be provided at the same time throughout the permitted licensing hours of the SHC.’

Citations:

Times 03-Aug-2000, [2001] 1 AllER 660, [2001] 1 WLR 1196

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1986 77

Citing:

AppliedRegina 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 by:

CitedLuminar 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 . .
CitedNorwich 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; . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84358

Laara and Others v Kihlakunnansyyttaja (Jyvilskyla) and Others: ECJ 20 Oct 1999

Public interest elements could justify national rules providing for a state monopoly on the running of licensed slot machines. Such rules were a restriction on the freedom to trade, but in this case, this was justified by public policy considerations.

Citations:

Times 20-Oct-1999, C-124/97)

Statutes:

ECTreaty Art 49

Licensing, European

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82890

Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Wilson: QBD 29 Jun 1995

The grant to an individual of a hackney licence in one local authority, does not stop the grant of a similar licence elsewhere. Though the court applied the ABC case, Buxton J rejected an argument that a vehicle was not a private hire vehicle for the purposes of section 46(1)(b) as it was a ‘hackney carriage’ and thus fell outside the definition of ‘private hire vehicle’ in section 80: ‘That amounts to saying that once the vehicle is licensed anywhere as a hackney carriage, that precludes the application, in respect of that vehicle, of any part of Section 46 of this act anywhere else in this country. Thus, if Mr. Wilson had driven his vehicle in other respects not in conformity with Section 46 in Truro or Newcastle Upon Tyne, the fact that it had been licensed in Beverley as a hackney carriage would preclude the application, by any local authority, of section 46(2) . . for my part, I cannot accept that this Act intends it to be the case that in every case where a hackney carriage vehicle exists it follows thereafter that the vehicle so licensed cannot be susceptible to the rules applying to private hire vehicles . . it cannot, in my view, be the case that simply to licence a vehicle as a hackney carriage thereby makes that vehicle a hackney carriage for all time, even if it is functioning as a private hire vehicle. In my judgment, therefore, it is not enough that a hackney carriage licence exists to establish that this vehicle was a hackney carriage as that term is used in the definition of a ‘private hire vehicle’ in section 80 of the 1976 Act.’

Judges:

Buxton J

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-1995, CO 1249-95

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

Citing:

AppliedBritain v ABC Cabs (Camberley) Ltd QBD 1981
A hackney carriage had been booked, in the district where it was licensed, to pick up a fare in another district. The prosecutor said that when and where the fare was picked up the hackney carriage had no relevant private hire licence and no . .

Cited by:

CitedNewcastle 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, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82795

Kempin T/A British Bulldog Ice Cream v Brighton and Hove Council: QBD 13 Mar 2001

An ice cream salesman driving around an area was not a roundsman so as to be exempted from the need to obtain a street trader’s licence, however regular his route. Though not defined in the Act, ’roundsman’ meant activities delivering pre-ordered goods within a locality. This interpretation was required in order to give effect to the purpose of the Act.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2001, Gazette 29-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982

Licensing, Local Government

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82725

ABC Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 7 Jul 2017

Temporary approval pending appeal was preferred

The company challenged refusal of fit and proper approval for registration as wholesaler of duty paid alcohol.
Held: The appeals were allowed in part. HMRC, having once concluded that the applicant was not fit and proper was not free to approve them pending their appeal. Better was a temporary approval under the 1979 Act.
Burnett LJ said: ‘A claimant seeking an injunction would need compelling evidence that the appeal would be ineffective. It would call for more than a narrative statement from a director of the business speaking of the dire consequences of delay. The statements should be supported by documentary financial evidence and a statement from an independent professional doing more than reformulating his client’s stated opinion. Otherwise, a judge may be cautious about taking prognostications of disaster at face value. It should not be forgotten that a trader who sees ultimate failure in the appeal would have every incentive to talk up the prospects of imminent demise of the business, in an attempt to keep going pending appeal. Equally, material would have to be deployed which provided a proper insight into the prospects of success in an appeal. There is no permission filter for an appeal to the F-tT. The High Court would not intervene in the absence of a detailed explanation of why the decision of HMRC was unreasonable. It must not be overlooked that the F-tT is not exercising its usual appellate jurisdiction in these types of case where it makes its own decision. Finally, there would have to be detailed evidence of the attempts made to secure expedition in the F-tT and the reasons why those attempts failed. Whilst the jurisdiction exists to grant interim relief in this way, its use is likely to be sparing because steps (i) and (ii) identified above should provide practical relief in cases which justify it and the circumstances in which it would be appropriate for injunctive relief to issue will be rare.’

Judges:

Patten, King, Burnett LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 956, [2017] WLR(D) 463, [2018] 1 WLR 1205

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Alcoholic Liquor Duties Act 1979 88C, Commissioners of Revenue and Customs Act 2005 9, Finance Act 2015

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedCC and C Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 19-Dec-2014
This appeal arises in the context of the regime which permits wholesale trading in alcoholic drinks and other dutiable goods which are held in, or moved between, excise warehouses without giving rise to an ‘excise duty point’ and thus attracting . .
CitedHarley Development Inc. And, Trillium Investment Ltd v Commissioner of Inland Revenue Co PC 14-Mar-1996
Hong Kong – ‘Their Lordships consider that, where a statute lays down a comprehensive system of appeals procedure against administrative decisions, it will only be in exceptional circumstances, typically an abuse of power, that the courts will . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromOWD Ltd (T/A Birmingham Cash and Carry) and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 19-Jun-2019
The wholesalers sought approval from the respondent for the wholesale supply of duty-paid alcohol. Approval was refused, but the parties sought a means of allowing a temporary approval pending determination by the FTT. The two questions considered . .
CitedJJ Management Consulting Llp and Others v Revenue and Customs CA 22-Jun-2020
HMRC has power to conduct informal investigation
The taxpayer, resident here, but with substantial oversea business interests, challenged the conduct of an informal investigation of his businesses under the 2005 Act, saying that HMRC, as a creature of statute, are only permitted to do that which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Litigation Practice

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.588986

Uber France v Bensalem: ECJ 10 Apr 2018

Approximation of Laws – Transport – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Services in the field of transport – Directive 2006/123/EC – Services in the internal market – Directive 98/34/EC – Information society services – Rule on information society services – Definition – Intermediation service making it possible, by means of a smartphone application and for remuneration, to put non-professional drivers using their own vehicle in contact with persons who wish to make urban journeys – Criminal penalties

Judges:

K. Lenaerts, P

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:221, [2018] EUECJ C-320/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Transport, Licensing

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608652

The Environment Agency v Gibbs and Another: Admn 15 Apr 2016

The Court was asked to consider whether each of two ‘houseboats’, both moored in the Hartford Marina on the River Great Ouse in Huntingdon, was properly found by the Crown Court not to a be ‘vessel’ within the definition provided by article 2 of the 2010 Order.

Judges:

Lindblom LJ, Teare, Holroyde JJ

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 843 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environment Agency (Inland Waterways) Order 2010

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Licensing

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601148

Milton Keynes Council v Skyline Taxis and Private Hire Ltd and Another: Admn 10 Nov 2017

Judges:

Hickinbottom LJ, Gilbart J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2794 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 751

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Licensing, Transport

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.599413

QiN and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of The Police for The Metropolis and Another: Admn 3 Nov 2017

Application for judicial review of closure orders as to two massage parlours in Soho.

Judges:

Choudiry J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2750 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 745

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.599417

Woodward, Regina (on The Application of) v Thurrock Borough Council: Admn 27 Jul 2016

Application for permission to apply for judicial review of a decision made by the licensing subcommittee as licensing authority of Thurrock Borough Council A time-limited premises licence had been applied for for a two-day music festival on 13 and 14 August 2006 at Aveley in the area of Thurrock Borough Council. A licence had been granted for this event some months before, but the event manager pulled out.

Judges:

Ousely J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3712 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.594614

Persidera SpA v Authority for the Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Others: ECJ 26 Jul 2017

(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications – Telecommunications services – Directives 2002/20 / EC, 2002/21 / EC and 2002/77 / EC – Equal treatment – Determination of the number of digital radio frequencies to be granted to each operator already holding analogue radio frequencies – Taking into account analogue radio frequencies used illegally – Correspondence between the number of analogue radio frequencies held and the number of digital radio frequencies obtained

Citations:

C-112/16, [2017] EUECJ C-112/16, [2017] EUECJ C-112/16_O

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Media, Licensing

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.591337

Campaign Against Arms Trade, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for International Trade: Admn 10 Jul 2017

The issue in this claim for judicial review is whether the Secretary of State for International Trade, who since July 2016[1] has had responsibility for licensing the export of arms, is obliged by law to suspend extant export licences to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and cease granting new licences, to conform with Government policy to deny such licences where there is ‘a clear risk that the arms might be used in the commission of a serious violation of International Humanitarian Law’.

Judges:

Burnett LJ, Haddon-Cave J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1754 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.590294

Unibet International Ltd v Nemzeti Ado-es Vamhivatal Kozponti Hivatala: ECJ 22 Jun 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – Conditions for the grant of a concession for the organization of online gambling – Practical impossibility of obtaining such authorization for private operators established in another Member State, Other Member States

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:491, [2017] EUECJ C-49/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Licensing

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588305

Online Games and Others v Landespolizeidirektion Oberosterreich: ECJ 14 Jun 2017

ECJ (Freedom of Establishment – Freedom To Provide Services : Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 49 TFEU – Freedom of establishment – Article 56 TFEU – Freedom to provide services – Games of chance – Restrictive legislation of a Member State – Penal administrative sanctions – Overriding reasons in the public interest – Proportionality – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Right to effective judicial protection – National legislation laying down the requirement for the court to examine of its own motion the facts of the case before it in the context of the prosecution of administrative offences – Compliance

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:452, [2017] EUECJ C-685/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Human Rights, Licensing

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588293

Chancepixies Animal Welfare, Regina (on The Application of) v North Kesteven District Council: Admn 6 Jul 2016

The claimant sought judicial review of the revocation by the Council of a dog breeding licence, saying that it had been made without jurisdiction.

Judges:

Edis J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3617 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Local Government, Animals

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588222

The Environment Agency v Barrass and Others: Admn 21 Mar 2017

Whether two marinas were waterways so that boats moored there required to be licensed.

Judges:

Lindblom LJ, Singh J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 548 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 193

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Thames Conservancy Act 1932, Environment Agency (Inland Waterways) Order 2010

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Licensing

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581097

Flibtravel International and Leonard Travel International v AAL Renting SA and Others: ECJ 15 Mar 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 96 TFEU – Applicability – National legislation prohibiting taxi services from offering individual seats – National legislation prohibiting taxi services from predetermining their destination – National legislation prohibiting taxi services from touting for custom)

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:211, [2017] EUECJ C-253/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Licensing

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580705

HIT and HIT Larix v Bundesminister fur Finanzen: ECJ 12 Jul 2012

Freedom To Provide Services – Article 56 TFEU – Restriction on the freedom to provide services – Games of chance – Legislation of a Member State prohibiting the advertising of casinos located in other States if the level of legal protection for gamblers in those States is not equivalent to that ensured at national level – Justification – Overriding reasons in the public interest – Proportionality

Citations:

[2012] EUECJ C-176/11, ECLI:EU:C:2012:454

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

OpiniomHIT and HIT Larix v Bundesminister fur Finanzen ECJ 17-Apr-2012
ECJ (Freedom To Provide Services) Opinion – Freedom to provide services – Games of chance – Legislation of a Member State prohibiting, on its territory, advertising of casinos located in other States where the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.578228

Uber Belgium v Taxi Radio Brussels NV: ECJ 27 Oct 2016

(Order) Preliminary reference – Article 53, paragraph 2, the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Inadmissible – Passenger transport by motor vehicles – private drivers using a Smartphone application to establish relationships with people wishing to conduct urban journeys – Obligation to have a license to operate

C-526/15, [2016] EUECJ C-526/15 – CO
Bailii
European

Licensing

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571257

Markus Stoss C-316/07: ECJ 8 Sep 2010

ECJ Judgment – Articles 43 EC and 49 EC – Freedom of establishment – Freedom to provide services – Organisation of bets on sporting competitions subject to a public monopoly at Land level – Objective of preventing incitement to squander money on gambling and combating gambling addiction – Proportionality – Restrictive measure to be genuinely aimed at reducing opportunities for gambling and limiting gambling activities in a consistent and systematic manner – Advertising emanating from the holder of the monopoly and encouraging participation in lotteries – Other games of chance capable of being offered by private operators – Expansion of the supply of other games of chance – Licence issued in another Member State – No mutual recognition obligation

V Skouris, P
[2010] EUECJ C-316/07, ECLI:EU:C:2010:504, [2011] 1 CMLR 20, [2010] ECR I-8069, [2011] All ER (EC) 644
Bailii
European
Citing:
OpinionMarkus Stoss C-316/07 ECJ 4-Mar-2010
ECJ Opinion – Free Movement of persons – Freedom to provide services – Gambling – Consistency of national policy regarding games – organization of activity of sports paris subject to authorization – Mutual . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 23 January 2022; Ref: scu.569408

Admiral Casinos and Entertainment v Balmatic Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 30 Jun 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 56 TFEU – Freedom to provide services – Games of chance – Legislation of a Member State prohibiting, on pain of criminal penalties, the operation of low-prize gaming machines (‘kleines Glucksspiel’) where no licence has been granted by the competent authority – Restriction – Justification – Proportionality – Assessment of proportionality on the basis of both the objective of the legislation at the time of its adoption and its effects when implemented – Effects empirically and definitely determined)

C-464/15, [2016] EUECJ C-464/15
Bailii
European

Licensing

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.566443

Lalli v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Another: Admn 9 Jan 2015

Claim for judicial review concerned with the circumstances in which a summary review by a licensing authority of a premises licence that authorises the sale of alcohol may be invoked and whether, and (if so) how, that authority must satisfy itself that they exist.

John Howell QC
[2015] EWHC 14 (Admin), [2015] WLR(D) 239
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547556

Pinnington v Transport for London: Admn 7 Nov 2013

Appeal by case stated brought by a London taxi driver, Mr Pinnington, following the rejection of his appeal against the refusal by TFL to issue him a taxi driver’s licence by justices at the City of London Magistrates’ Court. The question for the opinion of the High Court is ‘were we entitled to find, for the reasons given, that Mr Pinnington was not a fit and proper person to hold a taxi licence?’
Held: They were not. Appeal allowed.

Andrews DBE J
[2013] EWHC 3656 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Licensing

Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.567648

Hemming and Others v Westminster City Council and Others: ECJ 16 Nov 2016

Charges for processing application for licence

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom to provide services – Directive 2006/123/EC – Article 13(2) – Authorisation procedures – Concept of charges which may be incurred

L. Bay Larsen, P
[2016] WLR(D) 608, [2016] EUECJ C-316/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:879
Bailii, WLRD
Directive 2006/123/EC
European
Citing:
ReferenceHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 29-Apr-2015
The parties disputed the returnability of the fees paid on application for a sex establishment licence where the licence was refused. The fee was in part one for the application, and a second and greater element related to the costs of monitoring . .
At CAHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure Ltd) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster CA 24-May-2013
The claimant had submitted an application for a licence to operate a sex shop. On its failure it sought repayment of that part of the fee which related to the costs of supervising the system, rather than the costs of dealing with the application. It . .

Cited by:
At ECJHemming (T/A Simply Pleasure) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Westminster City Council SC 19-Jul-2017
The claimant challenged fees which were charged to the respondents on applying to Westminster City Council for sex shop licences for the three years ended 31 January 2011, 2012 and 2013 and which included the council’s costs of enforcing the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.571774

Regina v Gaming Board for Great Britain, ex Parte Benaim: CA 23 Mar 1970

A Gaming Club, Crockfords, sought the restoration of its gaming licence. It had historically found ways of circumventing the earlier Gaming Acts restrictions. The 1968 Act created the Gaming Board to assess their probity. They challenged the refusal saying that the hearing had not observed the rules of natural justice.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘Seeing the evils that have led to this legislation, the Board can and should investigate the credentials of those who make application to them. They can and should receive information from the police in this country or abroad, who know something of them. They can, and should, receive information from any other reliable source. Much of it will be confidential. But that does not mean that the applicants are not to be given a chance of answering it. They must be given the chance, subject to this qualification? I do not think they need tell the applicant the source of their information, if that would put their informant in peril: or otherwise be contrary to the public interest. Even in a criminal trial, a witness cannot be asked who is his informer. ‘

Lord Denning MR, Wilberforce L, Phillimore LJ
[1970] EWCA Civ 7, [1970] 2 QB 417, [1970] 2 All ER 528, [1970] 2 WLR 1009
Bailii
Gaming Act 1960, Gaming Act 1963, Gaming Act 1968
England and Wales

Licensing, Natural Justice

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.262770