Police involvement could threaten Pubwatch bans

Pubwatch groups could face legal problems defending banning orders if the police are found to have exercised undue influence on decision-making, a leading barrister has warned.

Lawyer Stephen Walsh said police control or involvement could mean a Pubwatch was no longer viewed as a private body and its decisions could be difficult to defend at a judicial review.

"If police are seen as an instrumental part of a Pubwatch or if there was significant funding of a group by the police and they were seen as part of the decision-making process it is highly likely that the group was exercising a public function," he told the National Pubwatch Conference in Northampton.

Walsh was commenting in the wake of a case involving Haverhill Pubwatch in Suffolk where an offender failed in a judicial review to overturn a ban.

"Pubwatch works best when it operates in partnership with the police and the licensing authority and that is fine provided a decision to ban someone is made by the Pubwatch itself," Walsh explained.

"If not it could be deemed to be an exercise of a public function and therefore liable to a judicial review.

"The reality is there is a not a Pubwatch in the country which could cope with all the legal ramifications," he added.

Walsh said a Pubwatch was a private body but if the police was deemed to have influenced its decisions it then took on the mantle of a public function.

Mark Worthington, community safety sergeant at Northampton police, said all banning orders had to be at the request of a licensed premises rather than the police.

"Do not get pushed towards the line where it is evident the police are exerting some control," he advised delegates.