Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Act: Dean of Faculty (Keen QC) and R G Skinner, advocate, instructed by R & J M Hill Brown & Co, Glasgow
[2] One letter of objection to the application was received from a firm of solicitors representing a named individual and Kelly of Cults Ltd. The material parts of this letter read as follows:
Having regard to the emphasis placed by the provisions of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 on overprovision, the objectors submit that if the application were to be granted by the Licensing Board it would result in substantial overprovision for the above reasons in terms of section 23(5) of that Act.
Our clients feel that their objections are well founded in law, having regard to the terms of the new legislation and its increased emphasis on Licensing Boards requiring to have regard to matters of overprovision. The licensing policy document of Aberdeen City Council also pays particular regard to its determination to avoid overprovision of licensed premises in localities.
(In the letter a separate ground of objection was advanced on the basis of the lack of suitable parking in the vicinity of the premises. As will be seen, this was rejected by the Board and it is unnecessary therefore to set it out here).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.