William Hill succeeds in appeal over imposition of licence conditions

Betting giant William Hill has successfully appealed against two conditions imposed on a new betting office licence in Wembley.

The conditions were imposed by the London Borough of Brent for a site next to a school. Objections were received from the headmistress and the police, who argued that the arrival of a betting office might worsen an existing problem with gang crime in the area.

Brent’s Licensing Sub-Committee granted the licence, but imposed conditions requiring that at all times there should be two staff on the premises and a maglock should be operated.

William Hill, which runs more than 2,300 betting offices across the country, appealed. Its counsel – Philip Kolvin QC of 2-3 Gray’s Inn Sqaure – highlighted the fact that the conditions had been imposed without warning or discussion, and without reasons.

The police and the headmistress gave evidence at the hearing, but the Justices concluded that:

• The conditions would not help to prevent crime or protect children
• They were not satisfied that crime locally was caused by betting offices
• They were concerned about the lack of reasons given
• The failure to invite representations from William Hill on the proposed conditions contravened the requirement of transparency
• Other betting offices in the area traded without these conditions, which suggested an inconsistent approach, unjustified by any reasons
• William Hill’s own management policies were responsible. However, if unanticipated problems arose, it would be open to the licensing authority to review the licence.

The Justices therefore found the conditions unnecessary and disproportionate, and so allowed the appeal.