Rertrobars Wales Ltd v Bridgend County Borough Council

Rertrobars Wales Ltd v Bridgend County Borough Council

Magistrates were entitled to consider the suitability of Nathan Lidster as designated premises supervisor and the relationship with Amanda Lloyd for the promotion of licensing objectives, even absent formal section 18(9) representations; findings of fact justified rejection of the licence application.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Rertrobars Wales Ltd; Defendant: Bridgend County Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Premises Licence, Designated Premises Supervisor, Licensing Objectives, Relevant Representations, Appeal Procedure
Administrative Law Licensing Law Premises Licence Designated Premises Supervisor Licensing Objectives Relevant Representations Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rertrobars Wales Ltd

Claimant

Bridgend County Borough Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether magistrates were entitled to consider the suitability of Nathan Lidster as designated premises supervisor absent representations under section 18(9) Licensing Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether Amanda Lloyd's suitability and control were relevant considerations for the licensing objectives
  3. 3 Whether findings of fact justified rejection of the application

Ratio Decidendi

Magistrates were entitled to consider the suitability of Nathan Lidster as designated premises supervisor and the relationship with Amanda Lloyd for the promotion of licensing objectives, even absent formal section 18(9) representations; findings of fact justified rejection of the licence application.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • respondent awarded costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed