Not an even-handed struggle

So regional brewer Greene King has ducked out of a potentially damaging High Court clash over costs. This is not at all surprising, but I am sorry, nevertheless.

The problem was that the issue, although legitimate, would have involved it in a possible confrontation with local pensioners, who were caught up in a protest about extended hours for a neighbouring pub. It shows that the new licensing system is not as fair for both sides as it was made out to be.

Greene King did nothing wrong. As many pubcos would, it talked to objectors, reached compromises, and won modest extra hours from the licensing committee. It was the objectors who took the brewery to the magistrates on appeal. The magistrates threw out all their complaints, but signally failed to address the issue of costs. To my mind, that was unfair. Clearly, one can dress this up (in the same way as that paragon of even-handedness, the Daily Mail did) as a triumph of David over Goliath.

But that is not the point. It might not have been a rich regional brewer, but a struggling sole trader, taken to the magistrates by Mail-reading semi-professional campaigners, having to shell out to defend quite proper licensing hours. Why should he not have his costs, when the magistrates find that charges against him are trumped-up and unsubstantiated?

Without doubt, the licensed trade has spent far more than expected on licensing reform, including long hours spent dealing with reasonable and hypothetical objections. There should at least be some acceptance that if you directly contest the licensing committee's decision by appealing without real evidence, you could have to pay up if you lose.