Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1968 |
| Date | 1968 |
| Court | Divisional Court |
Gaming - Amusements with prizes - Gaming machines - Permit for premises - Discretion of local authority refusing application for permit - Appeal to quarter sessions - Whether merits of application at large on appeal - Whether discretion of quarter sessions absolute -
A café proprietor applied under section 49 (1) and paragraph 1 of Schedule 6 to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963, F1 for a permit to provide amusements with prizes in his café, and after a hearing the local authority in the exercise of discretion refused the application. The applicant appealed under paragraph 6 of Schedule 6, and after a re-hearing quarter sessions exercised discretion on the merits, allowed the appeal and granted the permit. The local authority appealed.
On the contention that the jurisdiction of quarter sessions was limited to a consideration of whether or not the local authority's discretion had been exercised judicially and on correct principles:
Held, dismissing the appeal, that on an appeal under paragraph 6 of Schedule 6 to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963, no question arose of the exercise of judicial discretion but the application was wholly at large on the merits; so that quarter sessions had jurisdiction to exercise an absolute discretion uninfluenced by the action of the local authority (post, pp. 52D).
The following cases are referred to in the judgment:
Charles Osenton & Co. v. Johnston [
Evans v. Bartlam [
No additional cases were cited in argument.
CASE STATED by Bournemouth Quarter Sessions.
On September 20, 1967, the applicant, Samuel Sydney Godfrey, appeared as appellant in an appeal lodged pursuant to paragraph 6 of Schedule 6 to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963, against the refusal of the local authority, the Bournemouth Corporation, through their general services committee, to grant a permit for the provision of amusements with prizes at the applicant's café at 670 Wimborne Road, Winton, Bournemouth.
The recorder found the following facts. The applicant was the lessee and proprietor of Charley's Café at 670 Wimborne Road. When the applicant first took over the café in 1965, there was a juke-box installed in the café, but this was subsequently removed by him to give him more table space and because it was too noisy. The café was 26 feet long and 16 feet wide and had a counter in addition. The food was prepared at the back of the café by the applicant's wife and another lady. He operated an optional table service at the café, there being some 10 tables and seating accommodation for about 50 people. The applicant's customers were mainly working class people from neighbouring businesses, such as Lee Motors Ltd. and Castle Laundry Ltd. and some 200–300 people visited the café during a normal week. That figure included repeated visits by the same individuals. The café had not attracted many young people since the juke-box had been removed. The café's opening hours were 8 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. on weekdays, 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Saturdays, and it was closed all day Sundays. There was no liquor or dancing licence and there was no other amusement machine installed, although in 1965 the local authority granted a permit for a pin-table, which was taken out because it was too noisy and cumbersome. A permit for a fruit machine had been applied for and refused in 1966.
On May 26, 1967, the applicant completed and submitted to the local authority an application for a permit for a fruit machine at 670 Wimborne Road, Winton. The fruit machine would pay out tokens to the value of 5s. which could then be exchanged for goods over the café counter, and the machine was to be a 3d. playing machine. The local authority were the local authority entitled to consider this application pursuant to section 49 and Schedule 6 to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963. The local authority gave the applicant an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and asylum chamber), 2018-01-24, [2018] UKUT 85 (IAC) (BA (deprivation of citizenship: appeals))
...CJ in Stepney Borough Council v Joffe [1949] 1 KB 599 at 602] or unduly restricted [Lord Parker CJ in Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation [1969] 1 WLR 47 at 4.119 However, there are cases in which this approach has not been taken. John Dee Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners [[1995] STC 94......
-
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and asylum chamber), 2013-08-30, [2013] UKUT 439 (IAC) (Deliallisi (British citizen: deprivation appeal: Scope))
...CJ in Stepney Borough Council v Joffe [1949] 1 KB 599 at 602] or unduly restricted [Lord Parker CJ in Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation [1969] 1 WLR 47 at 4.119 However, there are cases in which this approach has not been taken. John Dee Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners [[1995] STC 94......
-
BA v Secretary of State for the Home Department (deprivation of citizenship: appeals)
...CJ in Stepney Borough Council v Joffe [1949] 1 KB 599 at 602] or unduly restricted [Lord Parker CJ in Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation [1969] 1 WLR 47 at 51]. 4.119 However, there are cases in which this approach has not been taken. John Dee Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners [ [1995] ......
-
Deliallisi (British citizen: deprivation appeal: Scope)
...CJ in Stepney Borough Council v Joffe [1949] 1 KB 599 at 602] or unduly restricted [Lord Parker CJ in Godfrey v Bournemouth Corporation [1969] 1 WLR 47 at 51]. 4.119 However, there are cases in which this approach has not been taken. John Dee Ltd v Customs and Excise Commissioners [ [1995......