Councils have limited powers over licences

By Peter Coulson

- Last updated on GMT

Related tags Personal licence License Six months

Councils have limited powers over licences
It is interesting to note that NALHM, the pub managers' union, is taking up the cudgels on behalf of members whose personal licences may be under...

It is interesting to note that NALHM, the pub managers' union, is taking up the cudgels on behalf of members whose personal licences may be under threat.

However, the situation with regard to the suspension or revocation of personal licences is far from clear.

It is certainly not true to say that either the council or the police can arbitrarily take away a personal licence. In fact, councils have very limited powers to do so.

In the old days, licence revocations were rare, because if there was a problem with an individual manager, the operating company could take him (or her) off the licence by way of transfer, and could then claim to have "cleaned up their act" at the premises in question. This regularly happened.

That was, of course, when there was just one licence covering the manager and the pub. Now there are two or more - one, the premises licence held by the company, and the others, the personal licences held by the manager or managers.

It is true that the premises licence can be revoked by the council at any time, after following the proper procedures for review laid out in the Licensing Act 2003. They would act after an application had been received, normally by the police, but it could be another responsible authority or even neighbours.

But they could not initiate a review themselves. They would have to wait until a proper application had been received that they thought was valid.

In the case of a personal licence, however, the only time that a council can set up a hearing to review the licence is when they receive an objection notice from the police about a conviction incurred during the application period for that licence, or prior to renewal (which will not take place for at least nine years).

In all other cases, it is for the court before whom the personal licence holder appears to take action against the licence.

They can, if they know of the personal licence, either order the licence to be forfeit, or they can suspend it for up to six months.

If they do not know about the personal licence, then clearly they cannot make an order. But the person charged is required by the Act to reveal its existence, on pain of a further conviction and fine (and probable loss of the licence as well).

But the interesting point about the NALHM campaign is that it is not only personal licence-holding managers who can be charged with offences under the licensing laws. In fact, where there is an offence committed by a member of staff, even if they do not hold a personal licence, they can be charged individually.

The manager can, in certain circumstances, be charged with allowing the act or failing to prevent it, but as I have previously written, it seems more likely in this case that the police will go for a review of the premises licence, rather than target individuals.

It is not obligatory for the convicting court to cancel the personal licence, and there is machinery for appeal in every case, so it may be that NALHM's offer will be welcome by those who end up in front of the magistrates. There may well be mitigating circumstances (for example the situation where a sale to a minor was committed by a staff member who had received express instructions not to do so).

If the court does decide not to take action against the personal licence itself, there is nothing the police or council can do, until that personal licence comes up for renewal in the next decade. By then, circumstances may well have changed, and the time since the offence will have to be taken into account.

Related topics Licensing law

Property of the week

Follow us

Pub Trade Guides

View more