Bean Leisure Trading A Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Leeds City Council

Bean Leisure Trading A Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Leeds City Council

The Council lawfully exercised its discretion under the 2013 Policy to refuse renewal of the claimants' SEV licences due to the premises' proximity to sensitive locations. The Council gave adequate and rational reasons for its decisions and for departing from previous decisions, particularly in light of the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Bean Leisure Trading A Limited; Claimant: Ruby May (1) Limited; Defendant: Leeds City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Permission Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed; permission granted but substantive relief refused.
Legal Topics
Sexual Entertainment Venue Licensing, Judicial Review, Local Authority Discretion, Policy Change, Human Rights, Equality Duty
Administrative Law Licensing Law Local Government Law Sexual Entertainment Venue Licensing Judicial Review Local Authority Discretion Policy Change Human Rights +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bean Leisure Trading A Limited

Claimant

Ruby May (1) Limited

Claimant

Leeds City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Permission Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Leeds City Council's refusal to renew SEV licences for Wildcats and Deep Blue was lawful and rational under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended
  2. 2 Whether the Council gave adequate reasons for its decisions and for departing from previous decisions
  3. 3 Whether the Council's decision was a disproportionate interference with the claimants' rights under Article 1 of the First Protocol ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Council lawfully exercised its discretion under the 2013 Policy to refuse renewal of the claimants' SEV licences due to the premises' proximity to sensitive locations. The Council gave adequate and rational reasons for its decisions and for departing from previous decisions, particularly in light of the significant policy shift. There was no breach of natural justice, no irrationality, no disproportionate interference with Convention rights, and no failure to comply with the public sector equality duty.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed; permission granted but substantive relief refused.

Orders

  • Permission to bring judicial review granted to both claimants.
  • Substantive claims for judicial review dismissed.