Who would outrank who

[MrsMorseEndeavour]

Between a Chairman and an alcohol licence holder, when it comes to an activity involving the need for the licence. So who would have the overall say on whether a licensed event went ahead?

The licence holder has legal responsibilities, therefore can veto
The chairman can say no to an event happening, but cannot enforce that an event happens which the licence holder has objections to under their legal responsibilities

Nice voting choices OP.

The licencee I'd say, as it is their licence being used.

Licensee. It's on their head if things go tits up. Potential loss of licence and big fine

Licensee. The Chairman has no legal standing in the matter.

Both have the power of veto, i.e. either one can stop the event going ahead. Neither can force the other to make the event go ahead.

I’ve thought of it differentl so voted in a different way. The chairman can direct an event to happen so they outrank the license holder. If it would breach the license the holder is legally obliged to refuse it however. But a chairman could kick up merry hell if a license holder just didn’t fancy doing it.

I am a Licence Holder. I cannot authorise any event which will breach any of the terms of the Premises Licence, the Temporary Event Licence or my Personal Licence. It would very much depend on what the situation was as to who was in the wrong/ right. The penalties for breach of Licence can be very harsh and would fall on the Licence Holder....

Thanks, that has cleared things up