Texaco Ltd v City Of Glasgow Licensing Board & Ors [1998] ScotCS 37 (27 October 1998)

Texaco Ltd v City Of Glasgow Licensing Board & Ors [1998] ScotCS 37 (27 October 1998)

The Board's refusal was justified under section 17(1)(b) because the premises were primarily a petrol station with insufficient grocery operations to warrant an alcohol licence, and the Board was entitled to consider the impact on anti-drink-driving policy. There was no adequate basis for refusal under section 17(1)(c), as the Board did not make findings or provide reasons sufficient to meet that statutory test.

Citation
[1998] ScotCS 37
Parties
Pursuers and Appellants: Texaco Limited; First Defender and Respondent: City of Glasgow Licensing Board; Second Defender and Respondent: Isabella Wilson; Third Defender and Respondent: Ruth Mooney
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 October 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sheriffdom Decision (licensing Refusal) / Court of Session (appellate Review)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Board's refusal sustained under section 17(1)(b); refusal under section 17(1)(c) not justified.
Legal Topics
Licensing (scotland) Act 1976, Off Sale Alcohol Licence, Petrol Station Licensing, Judicial Review of Licensing Board Decisions
Administrative Law Licensing Law Licensing (scotland) Act 1976 Off Sale Alcohol Licence Petrol Station Licensing Judicial Review of Licensing Board Decisions

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Texaco Limited

Pursuers and Appellants

City of Glasgow Licensing Board

First Defender and Respondent

Isabella Wilson

Second Defender and Respondent

Ruth Mooney

Third Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sheriffdom Decision (licensing Refusal) / Court of Session (appellate Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Licensing Board's refusal of an off-sale licence was justified under section 17(1)(b) or (c) of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976
  2. 2 Whether the Board's reasons were adequate and lawful
  3. 3 Whether the sheriff erred in upholding refusal under section 17(1)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

The Board's refusal was justified under section 17(1)(b) because the premises were primarily a petrol station with insufficient grocery operations to warrant an alcohol licence, and the Board was entitled to consider the impact on anti-drink-driving policy. There was no adequate basis for refusal under section 17(1)(c), as the Board did not make findings or provide reasons sufficient to meet that statutory test.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Board's refusal sustained under section 17(1)(b); refusal under section 17(1)(c) not justified.

Orders

  • Board's refusal of the application for an off-sale licence is sustained under section 17(1)(b) of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976.
  • Refusal under section 17(1)(c) is not justified.