Hackney’s new Licensing Policy causes uproar

Obtaining late-hours for alcohol-licensed premises in Hackney has been a challenge for some time now. However, it’s not been completely impossible, as we have previously shown, even when facing opposition from the licensing authority itself.

Regrettably, a difficult task is likely to become even harder now that Hackney Council has unanimously adopted a new licensing policy under which:

  • at weekends, “core” midnight closing times, and
  • on other nights of the week 11pm closing times,

are to apply for all new venues, meaning that an applicant will have to prove to the Licensing Committee’s satisfaction that granting its application will not cause antisocial problems.

That’s not all because, in addition, the Council has voted to double the size of its existing Cumulative Impact Zone in Shoreditch – arguably London’s most vibrant nightlife area.

The rationale for this was explained in an open statement made by Hackney’s Licensing Chair, Cllr Emma Plouviez (that can be downloaded below), in which she says that the Council’s “aim has always been to agree an approach that is shaped by the views of visitors, licensees and local residents”.

However, both that rationale and the unanimous vote by councillors in favour of the new policy ignore the fact that the Council received 680 responses to its consultation on the proposed new policy, of which 73% were against the proposals.

It also runs counter to the Mayor of London’s vision of the capital as a 24-hour city, chef Neil Rankin tweeting “24 city my arse” and continuing: “And that’s it. Hackney councillors have just unanimously voted through some of the toughest restrictions on nightlife in Britain, in the face of overwhelming opposition from local residents. We’ll keep campaigning for a Hackney that is diverse, independent and fun”.

Commenting to the Hackney Gazette on the Council’s decision, Jonathan Downey (founder of the Street Feast venue in Shoreditch) has hinted that the new policy may be challenged, saying: “This is a disgraceful decision and a shameful failure of elected officials to listen to the views of residents. It is disastrous for the life and vibrancy of Hackney nightlife. This is not over, though, and we will not be ignored.”

His views are shared by Tim Foster (“Head of Being Awesome” at the Yummy Pub Company) who has tweeted: “Shame on you all @MayorofLondon how to lose an incredible economy from one who already has his licence to trade I want to inspire the new, diverse, unique future operators. Trust this tweet, you’ll regret it!!”

Further developments are awaited!

UPDATES:

  1. Hackney Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy 2018-2023 can now be downloaded below.
  2. The new licensing policy has attracted serious opposition from a campaign group calling itself “We Love Hackney” (WLH), details of which can be found here. WLH claims to “have over 4000 supporters – local people taking a stand to keep Hackney diverse, independent and fun” and is proposing to judicially review the new policy, stating: “…Hackney Council failed to consider the impact on young people, who are more likely to use and work in the night time economy, or on the diverse range of venues that serve our LGBTQ+ and minority communities.”
  3. Judicial review proceedings were subsequently commenced by WLH. You can access here the judgment delivered by Mrs Justice Farbey on 17 April 2019 – in the case of R (on the application of We Love Hackney Limited) -v- London Borough of Hackney [2019] EWHC 1007 (Admin) Case No: CO/4222/2018 – dismissing a renewed application for a Costs Capping Order and ordering WLH to pay security for costs in the sum of £60,000 if it intended to proceed with its claim for judicial review.
  4. On 8 May 2019, the judicial review proceedings brought by WLH were struck out after the campaign group refused to pay the above-mentioned sum into court to cover the council’s costs should the claim ultimately be unsuccessful. This was reported in the Hackney Citizen on 5 June 2019. A copy of the Hackney Citizen article can also be downloaded below.
  5. On 7 June 2019, the above was reported in LocalGovernmentLawyer (under the heading “Judge strikes out JR claim after claimant refuses to pay money into court”) as follows:

A judicial review claim brought by the “We Love Hackney” campaign against changes to Hackney Council’s licensing policy has been struck out after the campaign group refused to pay money into court to cover the council’s costs should the claim be unsuccessful.

Mrs Justice Farbey concluded that the campaign had “successful and resourceful backers” with the resources to cover the costs but they have decided not to.

In March, the High Court rejected an application by the “We Love Hackney Ltd” group for a Capped Costs Order (CCO) in its judicial review of Hackney Council’s decision to adopt a revised Statement of Licensing Policy which made changes to Special Policy Areas (“SPAs”) within the borough and changed the core hours policy for licensed premises. The claim was the first judicial review to be brought against a Statement of Licensing Policy with reference to the Equality Act

The group argued that the claim qualified as “public interest proceedings” and should be protected by a CCO which limited the liability of the claimant for the defendant’s costs of the judicial review proceedings to £35,000 and that any liability of the defendant for the claimant’s costs should be capped to reasonable hours at the rates paid to counsel by the Government Legal Department (GLD) and the rates for solicitors charged by GLD.

However, the court said that it did not consider the proceedings to be public interest proceedings and that, even if they were, this would not be an appropriate case for a CCO because the claimant was formed by, among others, wealthy individuals with a commercial interest in the litigation.

“We Love Hackney” had claimed that the council revised plans – which generally restricted alcohol from being sold after midnight on Fridays and Saturdays in the Shoreditch and Dalston SPAs – represented an “unworkable and unreasonable restraint on operators who seek to apply for late night opening which will discourage innovation”.

Hackney had concluded that the high concentrations of licenced premises in parts of Shoreditch and Dalston had given rise to cumulative negative impact on its licensing objectives. The cumulative impacts specifically mentioned in the Hackney Licensing Policy Consultation document of 2017 were antisocial behaviour, public nuisance, crime, and noise intensified by a significant number of licensed premises concentrated in one area.

Applications for licences in those areas were made subject to a presumption that they will be refused unless the applicant can demonstrate that there will be no negative cumulative impact that is currently being experienced in those areas. It also extended the areas of the Shoreditch SPA (originally introduced in 2005) and confirmed the continuation of the SPA in Dalston, which was first introduced in 2013.

The “We Love Hackney” group – which claims to have more than 4000 members – campaigned against the proposed revisions during the decision-making process and then launched ajudicial review of the decision in October 2018, claiming that

a) The decision failed to recognise the interests of the groups with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, particularly the LGBTQ+ community for whom the bars and clubs of Hackney are important cultural spaces.

and

b) that the report of the group director for neighbourhoods and housing to councillors did not fairly address competing views on the merits of the SLP and failed to draw the attention of councillors to material and relevant considerations.

Speaking after the claim was struck out, Cllr Caroline Selman, Hackney Council’s Cabinet Member for community safety, policy, and the voluntary sector, said: “We have always said that our aim is to balance the needs of our exciting, vibrant nightlife with the needs of residents, who are entitled to a good night’s sleep. The policy was introduced after an extensive development process, during which we did a huge amount of listening, research and evidence gathering, and it is shaped by the views of visitors, licensees and local residents.

“We want to work with responsible licensees, who make a valuable contribution to the borough. The policy simply puts the onus on new applicants to demonstrate that they understand the pressures in each area and that by opening later their businesses will not have a negative impact to the relevant area. We are supporting them to demonstrate this and will continue to monitor the impact of the policy. Between August 2018 and April 2019, 23 licenses were approved within the SPA boundaries outside of the core hours, with another 38 elsewhere in the borough.”

We Love Hackney Ltd and its solicitors Leigh Day have been contacted for comment.