Secrets v Camden Council decision

Details of a failed attempt by SEV Secrets in Camden to revoke certain conditions relating to its licence can be read at the link below. The implication is that the local authority has discretion to impose conditions as it sees fit. I’ll post the full judgment when it becomes available. The solicitor acting for Camden was Philip Kolvin in this case.

UPDATE: Local Government Lawyer article by Philip Kolvin contains the following:

“In a detailed judgment, District Judge McPhee reminded himself that this was a statutory process adopted by the local authority which involved a significant local consultation process leading to the adoption of the policy and the standard conditions, against which there had been no legal challenge. He also stated that the decision of the sub-committee is the exercise of a power delegated by the people as a whole to decide what the public interest requires.”

The implication alluded to above remains: if a local authority acts in the public interest, and can demonstrate it has taken attempts to ascertain the wishes of its constituents, conditions can be imposed in line with this. Presumably some conditions might be regarded as contrary to free speech or rights to trade, but we have no idea what might be regarded as unreasonable from this judgment.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s