Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the process that the Council followed leading to its decision to approve an application for a variation of a premises licence. The complainant had a right of appeal to the courts against the decision. The complaint is therefore outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X, complains the Council processed an application to vary an existing licence when it should have insisted on an application a new licence.
2. Mr X says if the correct application had been used the Council may have decided not to approve the application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. All businesses and event holders must hold a licence to sell alcohol to the public. The Act sets out the separate types of licence required:
• any business or other organisation that sells or supplies alcohol on a permanent basis needs to apply for a premises licence
• anyone who plans to sell or supply alcohol or authorise the sale or supply of alcohol must apply for a personal licence
• qualifying members’ clubs need to apply for a club premises certificate if they plan to sell or supply alcohol
8. The Council is the body responsible for issuing alcohol licences as the licensing authority. Where an application is properly made and no responsible authority or other person makes representations, the licensing authority must grant the application, subject only to conditions in the Act.
9. If representations are made, it is for the licensing authority to decide whether those representations are relevant to the licensing objectives and not frivolous or vexatious. If the licensing authority decides that any representations are relevant, then it must hold a hearing to consider them. This is often the subject of complaints to us. At a hearing, the licensing authority may (among other decisions):
• grant the application subject to modifying conditions that are consistent with the operating schedule in a way it considers appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives;
• reject one or more requested licensable activities; or
• reject the application
10. Where the application is granted, with or without conditions, if an objecting complainant disagrees with the council’s decision they have the right to appeal to the magistrates’ court.
11. Mr X confirms he attended the Council’s committee hearing. He says he spoke to the Committee, outlining his objections to the applications and his concerns about which application should be used. The Committee and the Officers were satisfied the correct procedure was followed.
12. Mr X was aware that he could have presented and appealed to the court with his objections to the licences and associated conditions. It would then have been for the court to decide if it had enough evidence to decide the appeal. However, he chose not to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

13. Mr X is complaining about the processing of the administration of the application. However, he states the use of the wrong application affected the outcome. The Ombudsman cannot change the outcome the hearing, this is a matter for the courts.
14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as he had a right to appeal to the courts against the Council’s decision to approve the application to variation premises licence.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman