licensed premises

[bwfcolinh58]

last night me, my wife and daughter walked into our local and the landlord said my daughter should leave,this pub does not operate an age restriction policy, and my daughter is seventeen and not drinking.is he correct in asking her to go..

thanks in advance

[bednobs]

i would have thought it was up to the landlord who is allowed to drink in their pub

[dzug]

Yes he is perfectly entitled to ask her to go.

He didn't have to though - her presence was legal with his permission.

[Keeprockin]

He's entitled to refuse admission to whoever. Find a new local with a friendlier landlord

[Buenchico]

As others have said, any publican is entitled to refuse entry to whoever he chooses. He does not have to give a reason. The only exception would be where there was a breach of discrimination policy. e.g. a publican can ban all 'travellers' (who don't constitute a racial group) but he can't ban all Romanies (because they're regarded as a racial group).

Chris

[dannydingbat]

Chris, You may be interested in the following report of a case earlier this month in "thepublican.com". I know its not the complete judgement which will be interesting to see:-

"The managers of an Oxfordshire pub have hit out at receiving a massive fine after a man successfully claimed he was refused service because he is a traveller.

Carol Griffiths, licensee at the Blue Mile in Littlemore, Oxford, was ordered to pay Christopher Joyce �2,500 for injury to his feelings, �2,000 damages and �3,000 court costs under the Race Relations Act, relating to an incident that occurred on June 20 last year.

However, Mrs Griffith�s partner, Tony Webb, who has since been added to the licence, claimed the pub did not receive the court summons which was sent out on March 20, 2006 and has yet to receive any notification of the award or compensation. �We most certainly didn�t receive anything,� he said. �The first we heard of it was when the local paper contacted us. We haven�t been given the opportunity to defend ourselves.�

Mrs Griffiths denied she was a racist, claiming Mr Joyce was refused service because he and his family failed to leave her previous pub quickly enough after drinking-up time.

There is also confusion over any possible appeal. Mick Sheridan, a director for Maidstone-based React Inns, which owns the Blue Mile, said he will appeal.

However, React Inns is a division of the London & Edinburgh Swallow Group, which is in administration.

�I�m not sure what�s going to happen. Mr Sheridan isn�t returning my calls. I�ll have to appeal myself if I don�t hear from Mr Sheridan,� said Mr Webb.

Mr Joyce, who was assisted by the Oxfordshire Racial Equality Council in bringing the case, said he will return to the Blue Mile to order a drink when he receives the compensation money."

[Buenchico]

(With apologies to bwfcolin58 for 'stealing the thread'):

Thanks for that information, Danny. That judgement seems to extend the definition of a 'racial group' far wider than has ever occurred before. If it does go to appeal, it would be interesting to hear the outcome.

Chris

[brachiopod]

As an ex-licensee, the term 'pub' or Public House' is often misunderstood.
It means the 'licensee' (and now, the premises), are licensed to allow the public in.
It does not make it a public place or give the public any rights to enter.
Licensing Law, in the main, states what the Licensee is allowed to do (eg age restrictions, Permitted Hours (opening times) etc etc.) - not what he must do.
A Licensee can therefore restrict patrons to those over 43 years of age, and open only from 2.31pm to 5.12pm if he so wishes.

Of course, the realistic answer is that any Licensee that starts welcoming 17 year-olds onto the Premises on a regular basis (even though they are not drinking), will very soon find he has a whole crowd of 17 / 18 year old regulars and no sure way of knowing who he is permitted to sell alcohol to legally. These days, the penalties for selling alcohol to those underage are very harsh - and the Amended Licensing Laws allow next to nothing by means of a defence.
In your case, your daughter was accompanied by yourself and your wife - which I would see as a fairly harmless occurrence as a one-off (perhaps saying "we don't normally allow...... But on this occasion.... etc" may have avoided the 'asking to leave' situation).
However, from experience, I know how these things can spiral. Customer X brings in 17 year-old daughter and is allowed, so customer Y brings in 15 year-old son .... before you know it you have an infant school in your lounge bar !!
I agree it could have been handled more tactfully, though.