Albert Hall: going round in circles

Does anyone remember compasses at school? You had a stubby little pencil and you clamped it into a slot on one side, and the other side had a sharp point. You used it to draw circles — in my case, rather wobbly ones.

However, my circles were infinitely better than those devised by Westminster, where the city council has just been rubbished by a judge for its inability to draw. He called its exercise "so bad as to be irrational".

The case concerned the Albert Hall and its premises licence. Westminster council officials used the modern equivalent of compasses, the computer, to draw a circle round the hall, to alert the neighbours to a variation. It missed them out completely! The problem was that the circle was too small, because the Albert Hall is very big. But instead of looking at the map and seeing this, as any sensible person would do, they simply extended the circle. The council even sent a letter to a bus stop in Kensington Gore!

But leave aside this incompetence for a moment. A much more important point was decided, which practitioners in particular will be very pleased about. The judge confirmed, overturning the leading case on the matter, that late representations should not be admitted under the terms of the Licensing Act.

Until now, it had been assumed that a Belfast licensing case that went to the House of Lords had allowed late representations to be considered, not as "relevant representations" but as factors to be assessed when deciding on the conditions and/or the grant of a licence.

But the judge in this case held that the wording of the Acts was different and that the Licensing Act 2003 laid down clear guidelines on the timing for representations, both on initial application for licence and for variation. An applicant who reaches the end of 28 days without a representation being made is entitled to consider that his application is granted as proposed.

There has been "previous" about this in Westminster. I am not alone in receiving, after the end of the statutory period, a sudden "discovered'" objection that necessitates a hearing. Sometimes this can be as much as three weeks after the end of the period, when it would normally be safe to assume that no objections have been raised. It is an abuse of the system and ought to be stopped.

In fact, in their latest revision of the statutory Guidance, the Government has emphasised that any representations ought to be conveyed to the applicant with due speed, so that it can deal with them if possible — not stored up on the council computer, to be unleashed later down the line.

It is both unfair and unreasonable that objectors of any kind should be relieved of the time limits when applicants have to stick rigidly to these same limits or risk having their application rejected. Nowhere is this more so than in the case of Temporary Event Notices, and I am glad that the Government has at last recognised that in some cases 10 working days is unrealistic.

So from now on, it is hoped that when you get to the final day printed on your blue notice and on the acknowledgement of your application, it will mean what it says — that is the end of the objection period. If you then phone to confirm lack of objections, that means a hearing will not be necessary and the licensing authority must grant the application as it stands.

This is a good judgement for the licensed trade, but not very good for the Albert Hall. Thanks to the circles in Westminster, its variation was quashed and it has to apply again!