Doomsday predictions fade
The new regime does not provide the freedom or profit many pubs hoped for, but it has not been all doom and gloom, explains Graeme Cushion a partner at legal firm Poppleston Allen
It's hard to believe that the new licensing regime has been in operation for nearly a year. So how has it been? Has it been a
success? Has it made your lives more straightforward from a licensing point of view? Did you get later hours? Is your bar more
profitable as a result? From a licensing lawyer's perspective, the regime has meant a lot less travelling to remote Magistrates Courts for what were, in effect, reasonably straightforward hearings. Any application which does not
attract any representations now goes through on delegated authority. That said, it seems as if a fairly significant percentage of applications do attract some form of representation, even if they can ultimately be resolved prior to a hearing actually being required.
It seems the vast majority of premises have obtained permission to stay open later even if it is only an increase of one or two hours on a Friday and Saturday night.
The early feedback from operators was that profitability has not increased dramatically as a result. Customers do not really spend any more money but simply spend the same over a longer period of time. In addition, there are the increased overheads of remaining open later, to be
factored in. Nevertheless, it seems that food-led premises and community-led pubs have generally seen an increase in trade. For those who have bars in high-street locations, not a lot has changed in terms of the bottom line.
Crime and disorder
One of the fears associated with the new
regime was that the later hours would simply exacerbate the existing problems of crime and disorder rather than curing them as the Government intended. Reports, after a few months, seemed to suggest there had been an overall reduction in violent crime nationwide, but this view conflicts with the
feelings of individual police forces which I have spoken to in the course of defending review applications. They say that the situation has worsened. People's drinking habits have not changed - they are simply drinking later into the night.
One source of annoyance for those involved in the operation of licensed premises, has been the difference in approach from one
local authority to another. This may not affect you, unless you have campuses and/or bars in different jurisdictions. Nevertheless, whereas some councils are relaxed and helpful,
others are not. Some councils have insisted on
submission of a plan of the premises with an application to vary the licence for later hours.
The situation with regard to variations in general has been judged quite differently by different councils. Some have been happy to accept revised plans in the case of minor modifications whereas others insist on a
formal variation application with the associated legal costs, advertising costs and council fee involved. Even a simple application such as a temporary event notice attracts different views from different licensing authorities.
Legal challenge
Some want the signature of the actual event user and will not accept the signature of a
solicitor on behalf of a client. Hopefully, some of these problems will be ironed out during the course of the current review of the Guidance under Section 182 of the Act.
Councils' policies have also been the subject of legal challenge. Judgement was handed down in the High Court in June, in respect of a Judicial Review brought by trade associations against Doncaster, Gloucester and Canterbury Councils. Doncaster and Gloucester backed off during the course of the proceedings but Canterbury did not. Essentially, they were insisting, within their policy, that certain information had to be included within an applicant's operating schedule, otherwise the council would be able to reject the application even if there had been no representations. Trade associations rightly felt that there was no justification for this within the legislation itself.
They were successful in their claim and costs were awarded against the council. It had a much broader impact on a large number of councils that realised it might be prudent to revisit their policies.
New powers
As the dust gradually settled following the mayhem that was the process of initially obtaining a premises licence, having
converted it from an old liquor licence, various enforcement bodies began to utilise their new
powers.
Specifically, there is the power of review which enables all conditions and indeed the
existence of a licence itself to be looked at afresh, concerning any problems with
running the premises.
Alcohol misuse enforcement campaigns were also continuing: police were provided with central funding to enable them to go out in numbers to visit licensed premises and look at problems.
Specifically, a lot of time and energy has been devoted to test purchasing.
The success rates have been worrying. It is not surprising that the volume of prosecutions has increased and police and councils are becoming hot on absolute compliance with
licensing conditions. Failure to do so can lead to closure of the premises and/or a review. All of this can be expensive and ultimately devastating for the business. The importance of due diligence has never been so significant.
In the backdrop of all the developments within the licensing regime, the smoking ban looms and further regulation is
imminent. This also comes in the form of the
Violent Crime Reduction Bill currently
passing through the Houses of Parliament. Alcohol Disorder Zones may be declared in particularly problematic areas and operators may be required to contribute to the costs of extra policing. In addition, new powers of
review will be forthcoming and, powers of
closure and prosecution in the event of
repeated underage sales.
So where does that leave us in terms of how the first year has progressed? It seems that the new regime does not provide the freedom that many operators had hoped for, or the increased profitability. On the other hand, it has not been the disaster that many feared.
