Local Government Lawyer


Local Government Lawyer


Local Government Lawyer


Local Government Lawyer

Government Legal Department Vacancies

Government Legal Department Vacancies



Newsletter registration

Subscribe

* indicates required
Practice/Interest Area(s) (tick all that apply)
Join our other mailing lists (tick to subscribe)

Local Government Lawyer and Public Law Jobs will use the information you provide on this form to send your requested newsletters and updates. Please tick the box below to authorise us to send the email newsletter(s) and alerts requested above.

You can change your mind at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the footer of any email you receive from us, or by contacting us at info@localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk. We will treat your information with respect. For more information about our privacy practices please visit our website. By clicking below, you agree that we may process your information in accordance with these terms.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

Jul 18, 2025

Smile for the Camera?

Annie Sayers gives an overview of the Family Justice Council’s Guidance on covert recordings.
Jul 18, 2025

ADHD diagnosis and disability

Does an ADHD diagnosis mean an employee is (rather than may be) disabled under the Equality Act 2010? That's the question the Employment…
Jul 17, 2025

Errors of law, materiality and remedies

A recent Court of Appeal case concerning “restocking notices” in forestry has wider lessons in relation to errors of law and remedies,…

July 17, 2025

What next for rent reviews?

Government plans to ban upwards only rent reviews have caught everyone by surprise, writes David Harris.

Jul 11, 2025

Turbulence ahead

The £205.2m Cardiff Airport public funding package is to be challenged under the Subsidy Control Act 2022. Jonathan Branton and Alexander…
Jul 11, 2025

PFI – a new era?

Melanie Pears explores the recent announcement by NHS England about the possibility of a private finance model for capital developments,…
Jul 09, 2025

Airport Subsidy Challenged in the CAT

Oliver Slater, Beatrice Wood and Steve Gummer dive into the latest Competition Appeal Tribunal subsidy control challenge, brought against…
Jul 03, 2025

AI, copyright and LLMs

What are the copyright and confidentiality issues arising from use of public and private Large Language Models (LLMs)? Justin Harrington…
Jul 03, 2025

FOI and communication

The Upper Tribunal recently considered the meaning of ‘reasonably practicable’ in s11 of the Freedom of Information Act. Jonathan Dixey…
Jul 03, 2025

Too much?

In the fourth and final article on a Court of Appeal judgment that involved an exploration of the law and procedure relating to challenges…
Jun 27, 2025

Closures of educational sites

The Court of Appeal recently refused permission to appeal in judicial review proceedings concerning the decision to close part of a school…
Jun 25, 2025

Public law case update Q1 2025

Kieran Laird and Sophie O’Mahoney offer a straightforward and concise overview of six public law and regulation cases from the first…

Must read

LGL Red line

Families refusing access to support

Is home a suitable option for residence and care for a vulnerable adult if their family refuses access to support? Sophie Holmes analyses a recent ruling.
Families refusing access to support

Must read

LGL Red line

Families refusing access to support

Is home a suitable option for residence and care for a vulnerable adult if their family refuses access to support? Sophie Holmes analyses a recent ruling.
Families refusing access to support

The Government has announced today that it has decided not to introduce locally-set licensing fees under the Licensing Act 2003 at the present time, a move that the Local Government Association described as "hugely disappointing".

In its response to a consultation on the issue, the Home Office said its next step would be to invite local government to provide evidence of its costs before proceeding.

Provision was made for locally set fees in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. A consultation held last year sought views on aspects of locally-set fees, such as:

  • the maximum amount that can be charged for each fee-paying process (the “caps”);
  • whether and under what circumstances licensing authorities should be able to charge differing amounts for different types of premises, including whether the use of National Non-Domestic Rateable Value (NNDR) should be retained; and
  • the mechanisms designed to ensure transparency and cost-effectiveness in setting fees.

Licensing authorities were asked to complete a survey of their costs for each fee-paying process. However, only 20 of 350 licensing authorities responded to this request.

The Home Office suggested that those responses that were received presented a "limited and inconsistent picture" of the relationship between licensing authority costs and income.

“They do not enable the Government to make evidence-based decisions on the details of the new regime with confidence or offer reassurance to fee-payers, many of whom are small businesses or community premises, on the consequences of moving to locally-set fees,” it added.

The Home Office said the responses made it difficult to set the caps, “as the responses are not sufficient to indicate the extent to which authorities reporting higher costs are outliers or not”.

Likewise, it continued, various estimates had been made of the overall relationship between costs and income, but the responses to the surveys did not provide clarity as to whether licensing authorities were experiencing a deficit overall.

“Therefore, they do not support the development of a credible impact assessment of the introduction of locally-set fees,” the Home Office said.

The consultation response added that the limited response from local government “implied that not all licensing authorities have the necessary capacity to estimate their costs, which is a pre-requisite for setting fees”.

The Home Office said it would work with the Local Government Association to ensure that local government was clear about what sort of evidence would be required.

Philip Kolvin QC, head of Cornerstone Barristers, who is representing sex licensing fee payers in the Supreme Court case of Hemming, said: “The most worrying aspect of the Home Office response is their conclusion that not all licensing authorities even have the capacity to estimate their costs, which they correctly state is a prerequisite for setting fees.

“Given that licensing authorities already have to set fees for other licensing regimes, including sex establishment and taxi licensing, the announcement ought to sound a clarion call to authorities to get their house in order.”

The consultation also looked at the question of a single payment date for annual fees. In this regard the Home Office has decided to consider further an option under which licence holders can nominate their payment date by notifying the relevant licensing authority, rather than introducing a universal date.

Cllr Ann Lucas OBE, chair of the LGA’s Safer and Stronger Communities Board, said: “It is hugely disappointing for the Government to miss an opportunity to ease the burden centrally-set licensing fees are placing on council services, which are already under pressure from a 40% cut to local government funding since 2010.

“Not letting councils set their own licensing fees and recover the full costs of applications from pubs, nightclubs and off-licences means that around £170m of taxpayers’ money has subsidised the drinks industry in the past decade. This bill is rising by around £1.5m a month."

Cllr Lucas noted that the Home Office had accepted the principle of locally-set licensing fees by introducing them as part of the Scrap Metal Dealers Act.

"It makes little sense to then decide they can’t be introduced for the Licensing Act," she argued. “Licensing fees haven’t risen in a decade despite an independent review calling for an increase in 2006. We will continue pressing the Government to ensure fees are increased and this subsidy is ended once and for all.”

The Home Office announcement was, however, welcomed by the British Beer & Pub Association.

Chief executive Brigid Simmonds said: “This is great news – in not moving ahead with locally set fees, the Government deserves our thanks for listening to our concerns. Such a change would have damaged small community pubs, which the Government is rightly keen to support. 

“Pubs do not enjoy any subsidy; they pay hugely into the public coffers through the taxation system, through beer and other alcohol duties, business rates, and a host of other taxes, which is why we are campaigning for more business rates reforms for pubs and a third beer duty freeze in the March Budget.” 

Jobs

Poll


 

Past issues

Local Government


Governance (subscribe)


Housing (Subscribe)


Social Care and Education (subscribe)

 


Place (subscribe)

 

Events

Events

Directory

Directory