The council had been consulting on plans to ban alcohol sales in the town centre between 2am and 6am, and was looking to implement it from 13 August 2013.
Pub companies Marston’s JD Wetherspoon, Punch Taverns and Stonegate all made representations against the controversial measures. They questioned the validity of the consultation saying that it was hard to find on the Council's website and difficult to understand. Concerns have also been raised over the evidence used to support the EMRO.
A statement read out at the hearing said: "Hartlepool Borough Council does not believe that any level of violence or anti social behaviour should be regarded as an acceptable or inevitable consequence of a vibrant night time economy.
"The Licensing Committee recognises the significant improvements that have been made to the town centre in terms of reducing violence but will consider the use of every tool made available to it to make Hartlepool’s town centre a safer place to live, work and visit.
"The Licensing Committee has considered the representations made by all parties and is satisfied that an Early Morning Alcohol Restriction Order could play a role in reducing violence still further but is mindful of the concerns raised by local licensees that a reduction in opening hours, in the current economic climate, could have serious consequences for the viability of their businesses.
"The Licensing Committee has determined NOT to recommend the introduction of an Early Morning Alcohol Restriction Order at the current time but intends to revisit the issue next year to establish whether local licensees, and in particular the Hartlepool Licensees Association, have taken responsibility for continuing the previous improvements."
Kate Nicholls, strategic affairs director at the Association for Licensed Multiple Retailers, said: “An EMRO should be a measure of last resort if the streets are out of control, not a weapon of choice to take away legitimately granted trading hours.
“Responsible operators in Hartlepool town centre have worked hard during difficult trading conditions on their own management standards as well as investing in security. The fact that crime and disorder in the town centre have fallen substantially over recent years is testament to that and undermines the claim that an EMRO is required.
“We welcome the Council backing for local partnership working and stand ready to play our part in delivering a better town centre environment and experience for our guests and workers. If the police and local councillors have any residual concerns, we would urge them to work with us – as well as using the full weight of their existing powers against the small number of isolated incidents.
“We hope other Councils take note and follow Hartlepool’s lead in thinking long and hard about the evidence base to support such a costly intervention, and its consequences.”
Speaking immediately after the hearing, licensing lawyer Jonathan Smith of Poppleston Allen said that it was interesting that the committee took into consideration the "financial implication of local trade".
Best Bar None chairman Philip Kolvin QC added: "EMROs are a very draconian remedy to apply to the leisure industry and any sensible authority would want to consider whether there are more creative methods to tackle crime and disorder. This is because an EMRO can have a serious economic effect.
"Any measures to get operators to work with authorities rather than applying a blunt instrument is to be applauded."
Brigid Simmonds, British Beer and Pub Association chief executive, added: “We are pleased that Hartlepool Council has opted for partnership working over the imposition of an untargeted Early Morning Alcohol Restriction Order. We all want to see a safe and vibrant night time economy and pubs in Hartlepool are keen to work with the Council to achieve just that.
"We hope other councils will follow Hartlepool’s example and recognise the negative economic impact of an EMRO on local licensed businesses.”