Kinematograph year book (1944)

108 The Kinematograph Year Book. duty and are used, notice must be exhibited on the public side of each pay-box stating the new exclusive charge of admission ; the total amount of duty on each price, and the price shown on the ticket used. Until stocks of new tickets are available Government tickets marked at the old rate of duty will be supplied at the new rates of duty and tickets for use on the increased rate of duty on and after the operation date may be purchased in advance. (6) As regards the issuing of tickets to Patrons, Exhibitors should pay special attention to see that the Cashier does not issue a ticket twice and that it is in numerical order ; also that the attendant at the entrance to the auditorium tears the ticket in half, otherwise he may find himself proceeded against for three offences on one ticket : (a) Re-issuing a ticket ; (b) Ticket not in numerical order ; (c) Ticket not torn — with a fine for each offence proved. As the Manager as well as the Proprietor may be proceeded against, the fines could be made very heavy. I would also point out that where there has been a previous conviction the Court is under a legal obligation to impose a penalty not less than a quarter of the maximum penalty, which is £50 for each offence. (7) Right to Refuse Admission. — Many inquiries have been made as to the right of an Exhibitor to refuse admission and sell a ticket. The Management have a perfect right to decline to issue a ticket for admission and he is not bound to give any reason for so doing. It must be borne in mind that a place of public entertainment cannot be regarded as being in the same position as a Railway Company, which is bound to carry anyone who tenders the proper fare. When a ticket is sold for admission to a theatre a contract is entered into and the patrons obtain certain rights and the Management incurs certain obligations. No one is compelled to enter into a contract. When the ticket has been sold and purchased and the contract has in fact been entered into the contract cannot be annulled except by agreement between the Exhibitor and the patron. When refusing to grant admission to the theatre it is not advisable for the Exhibitor to give any reason. Despite these notes it may be considered advisable to place a notice in the vestibule, where it can be seen, to the effect that the Management reserve the right to refuse admission. I would, however, point out that where a person purchases a ticket he must conduct himself properly and must observe such rules and regulations which are made known to him or of which he is presumed to have notice at the time of admission. Any special rules made by the Management should be brought to the notice of the patron at the time of admission. Any member, after such notice, committing a breach of such rules and regulations or otherwise misconducting himself entitles the Management to treat the contract of admission as being at an end with the result that he thereupon becomes a trespasser and may be removed. (8) The Rerating of Kinemas. — Rating authorities appear in some cases to be basing these assessments on ^wartime trading. One knows that to-day, because of war-time conditions, kinema* are doing remarkably well and are enjoying a greatly increased patronage. They have increased their prices, and if there was no question of Excess Profits Tax then no doubt the rental value of the theatre would be increased. In my opinion it is a very arguable point as to whether the authorities can justify any increase in the valuation by reason of the Excess Profits Tax as l/inemas are precluded from making and retaining more profit than in their standard years. It would be very difficult, in my opinion, for an occupier to show what would be the excess profits tax liability of a hypothetical tenant under the tenancy contemplated by the Rating and Valuation Act. I think, however, the liability to Excess Profits Tax is something which ought to be taken into account in arriving at assessments for rating purposes, seeing that the tax is at the rate of 100 per cent. I do not quite see why if an assessment was correct in the " standard period " it ought to be substantially increased now.