header-logo header-logo

Illegal enforcement?

18 July 2013 / Philip Kolvin KC
Issue: 7569 / Categories: Opinion , Commercial
printer mail-detail
rexfeatures_356675a

The Soho sex shop case highlights the need for an urgent review of the licensing fee regime, says Philip Kolvin QC

A case which started out as a squabble over licence fees for Soho sex shops has the potential to affect fees for licences and other authorisations for all manner of service activities. The issue came to the fore in the ground-breaking judgment of the Court of Appeal in R (Hemming) v Westminster City Council [2013] EWCA Civ 591.

Hemming

The background to Hemming was that sex shops were paying Westminster City Council £29,102 per year for a sex establishment licence under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982. The operators served freedom of information requests, replies to which revealed that the overwhelming bulk of their fees was being used to fund prosecutions of illegal operators.

After three years of litigation, the Court of Appeal, led by the Master of the Rolls Lord Dyson, ruled that basing licence fees on such enforcement costs was illegal. It falls foul of the Services Directive

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll