Kinematograph year book (1935)

Digest of Acts. 149 the majority of the shareholders of the company in question were alien enemies, the refusal was upheld by the Court {Rex v. L.C.C. ex parte London and Provincial Electric Theatres, [1915] 2 K.B. 466). Conditions. — Under Clause 2, Section 1, Licensing Authorities have much further powers than those given under Clause 1, as they can grant licences subject to such conditions as they may think fit in addition to the regulations of the Secretary of State as regards safety. The condition must be reasonable — L.C.C. v. Bermondsey Bioscope, 80 L.J.K. 1314. It has been argued on the words of the Act that these must be decided upon when the application for each licence is made, and not determined beforehand {e.g., most of the authorities issue a list of conditions which licensees must submit to), but this argument has not met with favour (see Rex v. Burnley Justices (1916), 32 T.L.R. at p. 696). Conditions or undertakings which have been upheld in the Courts include : Against opening on Sundays and Holy Days, even where noninflammable films used {L.C.C. v. Bermondsey Bioscope Co., [1911] 1 K.B. 445; Ellis v. North Metropolitan Theatres, [1915] 2 K.B. 61). Against showing any film to which the Authority objects {ex p. Stott, [1916] 1 K.B. 7) ; As to hours of opening and closing {Rex v. Burnley Justices, supra) . Against showing any licentious or indecent film {Rex v. Burnley Justices, supra). There is a distinction between conditions and undertakings and a condition as to the admission of children has been held bad {Halifax Theatre de Luxe v. Gledhill, [1915] 2 K.B. 49), but an undertaking of not so widespread a character relating to the same matter has been upheld {Rex v. Burnley Justices, supra). Breach of a condition is an offence for which the licensee may be fined, and at once lose his licence ; breach of an undertaking may lead to refusal of renewal. A condition that no film can be shown if a specified number of justices object is void, as different groups may think differently {Rex v. Burnley Justices, supra). Where the Licensing Authority enforce a condition that no film to which the Authority objects may be shown, the owner of the film is apparently without any adequate remedy {ex p. Stott, [1916] 1 K.B. 7 ; Stott v. Gamble, [1916] 2 K.B. 504). A condition that no film be shown which has not been certified for public exhibition by the British Board of Film Censors is ultra vires, as it sets up in place of the Licensing Committee another Body whose ipse dixit should be a test of what might be exhibited. {Ellis v. Dubouski, [1921] 3 K.B.D.) As to whether, therefore, the above conditions are intra vires is somewhat doubtful, and it might be argued that even if a film had not been censored and no notice given to the Local Licensing Authority, the only legal ground for proceeding against an exhibitor for showing the picture would be that of indecency. The argument was upheld in a summons brought against an exhibitor in the Midlands, by the Licensing Authority, on the condition that if it was desired to show a film that had not been passed by the Censor, three clear days' notice must be sent to the Licensing Authority. Police Supervision. — Any police officer and any person authorised by the Licensing Authority may enter any premises (whether licensed or not) where he has reason to believe that a kinematograph exhibition is being or is about to be given. A police officer needs no authority, and while there may pay attention to any other breaches of the law that he may suspect {McVittie v. Turner, [1916] 85 L.J. K.B. 23). If anyone prevents or obstructs him, the offender is liable to be fined up to £20 (Act s. 4). "The Last Days of Pompeii "-Radio, of course /