Amendments 100 and 101 deal with the rights of applicants to appeal to a magistrates’ court against a decision taken by a local authority to refuse, to grant or to renew a licence for a sex establishment.
Schedule 3 rules out the possibility of an appeal to a magistrates’ court where a licence is refused on the grounds that the number of sex establishments in the locality is already equal to or exceeds the number that the local authority considers appropriate, or that the grant or renewal would be inappropriate given the character of the locality. This does not leave the applicant without redress. Instead, such decisions can be challenged in a judicial review.
Parliament obviously took the view that this was the appropriate approach when it passed the 1982 Act. Schedule 3 to that Act is designed specifically to regulate sex establishments. Due to the particular entertainment that such venues provide, the Act recognises the need to equip local authorities with sufficient powers to manage the impact that sex establishments have on local communities. The Act gives local authorities the power to impose limits on the number of sex establishments in a locality or to refuse to grant a licence if they believe this to be necessary to protect the character of the locality.
In making these decisions, the local authority is required to use its discretion and judge what are and are not suitable locations for sex establishments. Given the nature of the judgments which the local authority will be required to make when deciding an application, we consider judicial review to be the appropriate mechanism by which to challenge these decisions because of the margin of appreciation that the court will accord to local authorities when deciding whether the decision ought to be upheld, as opposed simply to substituting its view for that of the local authority.
I appreciate the concerns enunciated by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, in our debates on this and previous amendments about the rights of applicants to appeal in a judicial review decisions taken by local authorities, but I hope that my comments have reassured both her and the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, to the extent that the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, feels able to withdraw her amendment.
Policing and Crime Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brett
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 6 July 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Policing and Crime Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c538 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:36:38 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_574913
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_574913
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_574913