The amended Home Office guidance under s. 182 of the Licensing Act
Andy Woods reports on the Home Office’s new amended guidance under s. 182 of the Licensing Act.
In June 2013, the Home Office issued further amended Guidance under s. 182 of the Licensing Act, with chapter 15 dealing with regulated entertainment and the effect of the Live Music Act 2012 and chapter 16 providing guidance to local authorities about Early Morning Alcohol Restriction Orders.
It is often easy, for solicitors in particular, to criticise the Government and those involved in drafting and implementing legislation; so I think the Home Office should be commended for continually updating the amended Guidance so as to assist all parties.
I have been involved in a number of contested hearings in the last month and there is no doubt that the Guidance issued by the Home Office gives us all a clear indication of important matters that need to be considered at the hearings. I have no doubt that without the Guidance; those who make representations would see opportunities to introduce irrelevant evidence, as would those making applications. The onus of course remains on those in charge of the licensing committee hearings to ensure that the correct procedure is followed and relevant submissions made.
Chapter 11 deals with review applications and is usually one of the first chapters I turn to when reading amended Guidance documents. The Home Office maintain at paragraph 11.5 that “it is not expected that licensing authorities should normally act as responsible authorities in applying for reviews on behalf of other persons” and I still think some local authorities are unclear as to whether or not it is appropriate for the local authority itself to submit a representation.
I have had experience in the last two months of a review application being brought by the Police, only to find that a representation was then submitted by the licensing authority which supported the Police position. I have to say that I did not think that this was appropriate, although I am pleased to say that in the end everything was agreed by all parties.
As soon as the review application was received by my client we immediately arranged to meet the Police and subsequently the licensing authority. We had a very constructive meeting around the issues at the premises and the Police were very clear and fair in what changes needed to be made. The Police did not go for revocation but assessed the issues involved and made a number of requests for further conditions to be attached to the licence that my clients were happy to agree to.
I still think that paragraph 11.10 is one of the key paragraphs in the Guidance document, as it stresses that “it is good practice for them to give licence holders early warning of their concerns and the need for improvement, and where possible they should advise the licence holder of the steps they need to take to address those concerns”.
The partnership element of the Licensing Act 2003 remains as strong now as it was in November 2005 when the Act came into force and I am still frustrated by a few responsible authorities who seem to stack up evidence against a particular site, rather than give an early warning of any concerns. It is much easier to solve problems at the outset rather than six months down the line.
A partnership is not only very important in the relationship between licence holders and responsible authorities, but it is equally important that those who are operating licensed premises liaise with each other to learn and understand how improvements can be made and similarly responsible authorities liaise with each other to develop good practice.
It is of course true that every case should be dealt with on its merits and every town and city has its own issues that will need individual attention, but sharing information and good practice whether you are a responsible authority or licence holder can only lead to improvements. It still surprises me occasionally when I propose conditions which are standard model conditions in a number of local authorities only to find that the local authority or responsible authority in question does not agree that the condition suggested is appropriate.
Andy Woods is a partner at Woods Whur. He can be contacted on 0113 234 3055 or by This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..