Premises licence transfers with immediate or interim effect

Outsource iStock 000007727531XSmall 146x219Andy Woods looks at the relevant provisions under the Licensing Act 2003 which permit an unlimited number of applications for transfers with immediate effect.

The Licensing Act 2003 sets out the provisions whereby an application may be made to transfer the premises licence to another person/party under sections 42 – 46.

Any person who falls within the category defined in section 16(1) may apply the transfer of a premises licence to him and the application must be accompanied by the premises licence or an explanation as to why it has not been provided.

If there is a designated premises supervisor at the premises and that person is not the same as the premises licence holder then section 46(2) requires the applicant for transfer to notify the designated premises supervisor of the application and if the application is granted to notify the designated premises supervisor of the transfer. It is an offence not to comply with this section.

The requirements set out in section 16 are that:

  • The applicant must carry on or propose to carry on a business which involves the use of the premises for licensable activities. 

  • Any person making the application pursuant to a statutory function which has to be discharged and interestingly enough at sub-section (i) a person of such other description as may be prescribed. Various bodies can also apply for transfer including a club, a charity, an educational institution and a health service body. Notice has to be given to the chief officer of police but the grounds upon which the Police can make representations are limited. Section 42(6) permits a representation, where a chief officer of police is satisfied that the exceptional circumstances of the case are such that granting the application would undermine the crime prevention objective. The notice stating the reasons why he is so satisfied must be given to the licensing authority within 14 days beginning with the day of which he is notified of the application.

The interesting section with regard to transfers of premises licences is section 43 which sets out circumstances in which a transfer application gives immediate interim effect. If the relevant box is ticked requesting that the transfer has immediate effect then the premises licence has effect during the application period as if the applicant were the holder of the licence. The application period means the period which begins when the application is received by the licensing authority and ends when the licence is transferred or rejected or withdrawn. The legislation does not extend the application period to the date upon which any appeal against the decision is determined.

If the Police make representations under section 42(6) then the licensing authority has to hold a hearing to consider the application and having regard to the notice, should reject the application if it considers it appropriate for the promotion of the crime prevention objective to do so.

This creates an interesting scenario which we have recently come across in that there is nothing to prevent numerous applications for transfer which specify that the application should have interim effect. If, for example, an application is submitted on 1 January 2014 for transfer with interim effect and if following a Police objection the application is refused at a hearing on 1 February 2014 then there is nothing to prevent a second application being immediately submitted for transfer with interim effect on 1 February 2014 which would then commence the whole application process again. In practice this could mean that somebody who is never approved by the licensing authority could in fact hold the premises licence under interim effect for several months.

We have also come across arguments relating to circumstances in which a new applicant cannot obtain the consent of the existing premises licence holder because of a property/civil dispute. There has been case law which confirms that the person who has established such a property entitlement should not be deprived of the opportunity to take control of the premises by reason of the existing premises licence holder withholding his or her consent.

In one case, decided under the Licensing Act 1964, a person suspended from his employment objected to an application for a protection order, but the Justices were held to be correct in granting the application despite consent being withheld. In a 1992 case decided by the Court of Appeal it was held that if an applicant does not have the consent of either the mortgagee in possession or the managers appointed by the mortgagees then that applicant cannot be said to be in occupation of the premises, cannot be said to be proposing to run the business and therefore an application would not be granted.

Andy Woods is a partner at Woods Whur. He can be contacted on 0113 234 3055 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..