Kinematograph year book (1945)

152 The Kinematograph Year Book. In the Courts RESTRICTIONS ON CHILDREN AT SUNDAY OPENINGS. Sunday Film Ban on Children. — In a reserved judgment given on March 30, in the King's Bench Division, Mr. Justice Atkinson held that the Weston-super-Mare Justices were entitled to make it a condition of a Sunday licence that no child under 16 should be admitted whether accompanied by an adult or not. He pointed out that the licence was granted solely for the benefit of the Forces. He was not prepared to say that the Justices were acting unreasonably by imposing a condition to operate for the benefit of the young. Lionel Harold Harman, licensee of the Regent, Weston-super-Mare, asked for a declaration that the Weston-super-Mare magistrates were not entitled, under the authority delegated to them by the Somerset County Council, to impose as a condition for the Sunday opening of the kinema that children under 16 should be excluded from performances. The contention was that the condition was ultra vires and unreasonable. The action was stated to be in the nature of a test action and to have the support of the Cinematograph Exhibitors' Association. Mr. Justice Atkinson held that the Somerset County Council should not have been joined as defendants in the action, and he dismissed them from the action. His Lordship said that the main contention of the plaintiff was that the condition imposed by the Justices was ultra vires, and that rested on the majority decision of a King's Bench Divisional Court to the effect that under section 1 of the Act of 1909 the power of the licensing authority to impose conditions did not extend to imposing conditions relating to the public interest however necessary they might be. That decision had never been referred to with unqualified approval, and there was authority for saying that even under the 1909 Act the licensing authority had power to consider public interest. He could see no justification for cutting down the discretion given to the licensing authority. . He held that the discretion which the Justices were free to exercise was not limited in the way indicated by the majority decision of the Divisional Court to which he had referred, but was unlimited, subject to this that it had got to be exercised in a reasonable way. He was satisfied that the Justices were entitled to consider matters relating to the welfare, including spiritual wellbeing, of the community, and he held that the condition was not ultra vires. As to whether the condition was unreasonable, it had to be remembered that prima facie the law was that Sunday performances were illegal. Parliament had given legal authority to go behind that, but only if the majority of the ratepayers of a district desired it. Weston-superMare ratepayers had not desired it. His Lordship was entitled to assume that there were in Weston a number of people who believed in Sunday observance, and who wanted their children to grow up to reverence Sunday and go to church and Sunday-school and who did not want to substitute films, particularly films judged suitable for members of the Forces. There were people who wanted their children to go out into the open air instead of spending several hours in a confined smoke-laden space. Could anyone doubt that it was good for the health of children to be kept out of kinemas on Sunday ? He had no doubt about it. The licence was granted solely for the benefit of members of the Forces. Why was it unreasonable for the Justices to say that they must not let the licence operate to the disadvantage of the young ? He was not prepared to hold that the Justices were acting unreasonably in imposing the condition. He held that the Justices' decision was intra vires and it was impossible to say that the condition was unreasonable. He thought it was perfectly reasonable and proper. The action failed and would be dismissed. Uncontrolled Children.— Three cleaners called in to act as temporary attendants at a picture house in Greenock sat down to see the show and made no effort to control children running up and down the passages and stairs. This was stated at Greenock Sheriff Court on May n, when the Pavilion Picture House (Greenock). Ltd., were fined £3 for having contravened the Cinematograph Act. A previous conviction was admitted. The Fiscal stated that N.F.S. officers visited the kinema to inspect fire appliances and could not find an attendant. The manager had gone home for tea. Odeon Organisation Praised. — Falling and breaking an arm when waiting in the queue of the Odeon, Morden, for the Children's Club entertainment, Peter Goodchild, then aged 10, of Bury Grove, Morden, sued (through his father), Odeon Theatres, Ltd., on May 23, in Croydon County Court, for £16 19s. 3d. hospital costs, and for compensatory damages. The action failed. Incidentally, the methods and aims of the Odeon Children's Club were discussed. At one stage, Judge Sir Gerald Hurst, K.C., remarked that the queueing up seemed to be extremely well organised on an excellent system. D. N. Holdsworth, manager, stated that to marshal the queue and keep order there were eight boys and eight girl " captains " on duty in addition to witness and the assistant manager, two police officers, the foreman, page-boy, two doormen and the car park attendant were looking after the children ; and there was nursing and other first-aid personnel. ASSESSMENT APPEALS. " Business Increase Not Solely Due to War." — An appeal against increased valuations of five Glasgow picture houses was refused by the Lands Valuation Appeal Court sitting at Edinburgh, on March 2. The Court held that the increase in business was not solely due to the war, and would continue for some time. The view was confirmed by the increase in rents of similar picture theatres, and also by the very large figure for which the Paramount, Glasgow, was sold in 1 94 1. The appellants were George Green, Ltd., 11-29, Renfrew Street, Glasgow, who appealed against decisions of the Glasgow Valuation Committee in regard to the valuation of the Playhouse, the Tollcross, the Bedford, the Strathclyde, and the Gorbals, operated by them. The principal question raised was whether the assessor was entitled to re-value the picture bouses in the present year. The Court held that