Premises associated with serious crime
The High Court has rejected a judicial review challenge against the Metropolitan Police and the London Borough of Newham over the bringing of summary review proceedings. Gerald Gouriet QC reports on the judge's reasoning.
In Sharanjeet Lalli v The Commissioner of Police For The Metropolis (1) The Council of the London Borough of Newham (2) the High Court earlier this month dismissed a claim for judicial review brought by a licensee of a public house located in the London Borough of Newham.
Following a serious incident at the licensed premises, the Chief Police Officer for the Metropolitan Police applied for summary review of the premises (supported by the relevant certificate) and the licensing authority imposed interim steps in the form of immediate suspension of the licence.
The claimant asserted that the required certificate was invalid as it was based on the opinion of a single member of the police force’s understanding of a single incident, and that this incident alone could not in the mind of any reasonable person create the association of the premises with serious crime required by the legislation.
The claimant further said that the licensing authority (Newham) should have decided for themselves whether or not a single incident was capable of amounting in law to serious crime or disorder ‘associated’ with the premises.
In his judgment, John Howell QC (sitting as Deputy High Court Judge), clarifies the requirement regarding certificates required to invoke summary review proceedings and interim steps:
“Parliament intended that the licensing authority should be entitled to treat an application for summary review made by the chief officer of police as valid if it is accompanied by a certificate that apparently meets the requirements of section 53A(1) and has not been quashed. The licensing authority is not obliged to consider whether or not it is liable to be quashed.
On a claim for judicial review of such a certificate, no particularly stringent standard of review is called for, given that the certificate itself has no immediate and direct effect on others and that all the circumstances, including any association that the licensed premises may have with serious crime and disorder, can be examined fairly on the merits when the application for summary review is under consideration.
In any event, however, in this case Commander Nash was plainly entitled in the circumstances as they appeared to him to give the certificate that he did, stating that the licensed premises were associated with serious crime.”
Gerald Gouriet QC of Francis Taylor Building (leading Patrick Whur of Woods Whur) successfully appeared for the London Borough of Newham.
It is understood that the claimant, represented by Jeremy Phillips of FTB, is considering seeking permission to challenge the decision in the Court of Appeal.
Philip Kolvin QC and Asitha Ranatunga of Cornerstone Barristers appeared for the Metropolitan Police.