Calderwood v. Renfrewshire Council [2004] ScotCS 24 (03 February 2004)

The Licensing Board provided adequate reasons for its decision, considered individual submissions, and lawfully applied its policy. The sheriff erred in law regarding adequacy of reasons, onus, and the nature of policy. The Board's original decision stands.

Citation: [2004] ScotCS 24
Parties: Pursuer/respondent: Mrs Carol Calderwood; Defenders/appellants: Renfrewshire Council
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 03 February 2004
Procedural Posture: Appeal Under Summary Application / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session
Outcome: appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; Board's original decision reinstated
Legal Topics: Statutory Discretion, Application of Policy, Adequacy of Reasons, Onus of Proof, Street Trading Licensing

Administrative Law Licensing Law Statutory Discretion Application of Policy Adequacy of Reasons Onus of Proof Street Trading Licensing

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mrs Carol Calderwood

Pursuer/respondent

Renfrewshire Council

Defenders/appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Summary Application / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Licensing Board provided adequate reasons for refusal of licence renewal
2 Whether the Board misapplied its policy and inverted the onus
3 Whether the Board exercised its discretion unreasonably

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; Board's original decision reinstated

Orders

Appeal allowed
Sheriff's interlocutor dated 14 March 2003 recalled