Noone's planning to challenge it in court at this point Richard, and you haven't been taken on as a lawyer, as you pointed put in your first post. What we've ben trying to do is clarify what the law is, and how it is interpreted in diffeent parts of the country.

And it's not as simple as you seem determined to suggest. You yourself have in fact contradicted yourelf at least once - you said that the Dudley Council guidelines were accurate, andn then that the question of payment was not material, when in fact Dudley Council had said it was a necessary criterion for something to be classed as a public entertaionment.

"The first (issue)is that of a public perfomance licence, and the law is correctly set out on the Dudley website at the link given above." Richard Bridge.

"The common definition of a public entertainment is one which involves one or more of the above activities, is publicly advertised and where a fee is charged either before the event or on entry" Dudley Council website.

Clearly there are plenty of cases where groups of singers and musicians play in bars in pubs where there is no Public Entertainment Licence, on a regular basis, without any problems. I've taken part in such sessions more times than I can remember, in many parts of the country. I've also been in pubs where we've been told not to play, because there isn't such a licence.

What is notb clear is whether it's a queswtion of a blind eye being truned to breaches of the law, because noone has complained about it, or whether the authorities see the music as incidental to what uis taking place in the bar - to quote the Dudley website: "There are exemptions for these requirements, which broadly speaking are as follows:-

If the music is merely incidental at functions...".

I think it is most likely the former - a blind eye being turned to the law in cirumstances where strict application would be silly and counterproductive.

But where the law is not enforced on a wide enough basis, this can have implications as to whether it in fact continues to be enforceable at all. There are lots of silly laws which have fallen into disuse, and which it would not in practice be possible to enforce now, even though they have never been repealed or amended. (Mince pies being outlawed at Christmas, that kind of thing.)

But it would be interested to actually have the words of the legislation involved. Which would be, so far as I can see: "the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982", "Schedule 12 to the London Government Act 1963", and "Section 182 of the Licensing Act 1964".