header-logo header-logo

Licensing

28 October 2011
Issue: 7487 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences v Albert Court Residents’ Association and others [2011] EWCA Civ 430, [2011] All ER (D) 118 (Apr)

Neither the Licensing Act 2003 (LA 2003), nor the Licensing Act 2003 (Premises licences and club premises certificates) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005/42), imposed any duty on a licensing authority to advertise an application or to take any steps to notify anyone affected by it that it had been made. The sole duty to advertise and to give notice of an application was placed on the person making the application. An otherwise legitimate expectation could not require a public authority to act contrary to statute. Any failure by an authority to act in relation to its extra-statutory notifications could not give rise to any right to interfere with the performance of its statutory duties. When exercising any discretion or power of decision under LA 2003, a licensing authority had to do so with a view to promoting the licensing objectives. However, once the authority was under an unqualified duty to carry out an act

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