Richard

I agree that the some of the sense of what I wrote was well hidden. Try this expanded wording:

"So he is not involved in the organisation if he does only those organisational aspects and even more so if he does none of those things nor any other organisational aspects. He must be involved in the organisation to a greater extend than the three exceptions."


The essence of what I was saying is that there is a world of difference between "only if he" and "if he only". The latter is the sense of the detailed wording. He is not a culpable organiser if the only organising he does is in the three exceptions.

The only offence in that situation is making a profit from organising the private entertainment, otherwise the entertainment is exempt from licencing and so no licence is required.

I don't doubt that you understand that and I am sure that you were not intending to mislead - but we have readers who would not have read it the way that you intended.