Sacha Lord loses legal battle against government to reopen indoor hospitality before 17th May
The judgement came just hours before a SAGE report emerged that stated that "eating out in any food outlet or restaurant was not associated with increased odds" of becoming infected with coronavirus (COVID-19).
The High Court has ruled in favour of the government in a legal challenge over its decision to delay the reopening of indoor hospitality until 17th May.
The judgement comes after Greater Manchester’s Night Time Economy Adviser, Sacha Lord – who is also the co-founder of Parklife Festival and Warehouse Project – and Punch Taverns founder Hugh Osmond, notably joined forces last month to take the government to court over hospitality restrictions as they argued that bars, restaurants and cafes should be allowed to provide indoor service on the same date as non-essential retail reopens.
It’s estimated that the delay in reopening indoor hospitality could end up costing the sector £7 billion over the five weeks.
The case to permit the reopening of indoor hospitality was expedited at the start of last month, and a response was initially supposed to be provided on the week commencing Monday 19th April – but was delayed.
ADVERTISEMENT
Following the delays, Mr Lord – who has continuously claimed over the last couple of months that the government has been unable to provide evidence for their reasoning behind the roadmap, and has insisted he will share the documents once received – took to social media last week to confirm that the case was with a High Court Judge and he was “expecting news imminently”.
He stressed that “every day counts” and that it’s about “data NOT dates”.
ADVERTISEMENT
Legal update:
We were informed a ruling would be made the week commencing the 19th.
We have now been informed, a High Court Judge was not available last week and it is now, at last, sat with him.
And after nearly a week of awaiting response, the High Court ruled in favour of the government in the case R (On the Application of Sacha Lord and Hugh Osmond) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, saying that COVID-19 justifies a cautious approach.
The judgement came just hours before a SAGE report emerged that stated that “eating out in any food outlet or restaurant was not associated with increased odds” of becoming infected with coronavirus (COVID-19), and while it’s said that the report was not disclosed by the defence during the legal proceedings, in the overview, the Honourable Mr Justice Julian Knowles dismissed the call for Judicial Review to bring forward indoor reopenings as “academic”.
“This case is not ‘academic’ for an industry that is losing £200m every day it remains closed,” Hugh Osmand commented.
ADVERTISEMENT
“For the over three million people who work in our industry, or for the tens of thousands of businesses, suppliers, landlords and contractors forced into bankruptcy by government measures, our legal action gave them a fighting chance,
“Yet once again in 2021, the strong arm of the state has come crushing down on hope and aspiration.
“The judge said that Covid ‘justifies a precautionary or cautious approach on the part of the government’, but when a crucial SAGE report is ignored, this goes far beyond caution, and questions need to be asked about when this advice was sought and why this important evidence was not disclosed.
“I am deeply concerned that the judge’s main reason for refusing judicial review was because our claim ‘was not brought promptly’, even though we issued our claim days after the roadmap became law on 25th March, with the court taking a month to provide its ruling.
“This judgment drives a coach and horses through our normal constitutional processes.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Are we really being told that we should have issued legal proceedings on the basis of a Prime Minister’s press conference and a yet to be published set of laws?
“Our democracy should be better than this”.
In a normal legal case, non-disclosure of evidence like the Sage report would wreck the Government's case. But, after considering it over the weekend, our legal team advise it is not grounds to challenge the Judicial Review decision. We will be reviewing other legal options.
The Gov’t FAILED to disclose a SAGE report, confirming that during the whole pandemic, only 226 cases were associated to Hospitality. pic.twitter.com/bQlRquPCW5
Commenting on the decision, Sacha Lord said in a statement: “We are disappointed with the outcome.
“While this fight has always been an uphill battle, made harder by the government’s delaying tactics and refusal to mediate, we are pleased that the case has shone a light on the hospitality sector and the unfair and unequal guidance within the recovery roadmap [as] through our legal challenges, we have achieved significant outcomes for the sector, abolishing the substantial meal requirement with our previous court action and lobbying hard to remove with the 10pm curfew.
“Both of these results have had a hugely positive impact on operators nationwide who have been unfairly treated throughout this crisis and undoubtedly saved many jobs throughout the industry.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Through our legal action, we have sent a clear, strong message direct to the heart of government [and] we will continue to advocate for those who have been unfairly impacted throughout this crisis, and despite the outcome, we will continue to hold the government to account and demand evidence-based decisions, rather than those drafted without detailed analysis or based on bias or whim”.
Flickr
He continued: “The hospitality sector has gone above and beyond to implement measures which provide safe, secure environments – measures which were, let’s not forget, advised as safe by the government themselves and which the court already deemed to be effective based on the evidence we provided in support of our previous judicial review.
“There are thousands of bars, pubs and restaurants across the country which are still closed and whose owners and employees are struggling financially due to these unfair restrictions.
“For the 40% minority who do have outdoor space, this weekend’s weather has only exacerbated the ongoing struggles the industry has continually faced, and I’ve heard of countless pubs that have been forced to close early or who have had zero customers due to the bad weather.
“Not only does this severely impact on business and sector recovery, but on the staff whose wages, and ability to pay rent, food and bills, are at the mercy of something as unpredictable as the weather”.
Featured Image – Weird & Wonderful
News
TfGM unveils ‘significant’ programme of Metrolink engineering works to run throughout 2026
Emily Sergeant
A ‘significant’ programme of works are set to be carried out across Greater Manchester’s tram network this year.
As part of a wider £150m plan to ‘maintain, upgrade, and improve’ tram infrastructure across the region and make sure the Bee Network continues to deliver reliable and accessible services for millions more people into the future, Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) has announced that it’ll be undertaking various works throughout 2026.
And just as you’d expect, there is expected to be some ‘temporary periods of disruption’ for passengers while they are carried out.
Work is set to begin from this spring through to the autumn at a number of locations across the Greater Manchester network – including near Trafford Bar, Deansgate-Castlefield, Monsall, Newton Heath & Moston, Eccles, Derker and Piccadilly Gardens.
This does mean trams will have to stop on some lines while the work is done, but TfGM will reveal more information on this in due course, and promises ‘plenty of notice’ too, so keep your eyes peeled.
A ‘significant’ programme of Metrolink engineering works are set to run throughout 2026 / Credit: TfGM
The first major works will take place during the Easter Weekend at Trafford Bar and Deansgate-Castlefield, which are ‘preparatory works’ ahead of full track replacement later in the year, set to be carried out over four days from 3 to 6 April.
During this closure, rail replacement work will also take place on the Altrincham line, meaning there will be no trams on the Altrincham, Eccles, and Trafford Park lines all weekend, while the East Didsbury and Manchester Airport lines will run to Firswood only.
Aside from plans for engineering works, there will also be somewhat reduced services for a different reason for a large chunk of the year.
From Monday 30 March until autumn, a revised timetable will be introduced across the tram network while a significant recruitment drive gets underway to ‘take on and train up’ new tram drivers in a bid to build extra capacity and resilience in the workforce.
TfGM has indicated that some disruption will be caused for passengers / Credit: Janus Boye
During this time though, TfGM promises there will still be ‘reliable and frequent’ tram services running every 15 minutes and every 7.5 minutes at the busiest times on the most popular lines.
“Keeping our network safe, reliable, and ready for the future is our absolute priority,” explained Ian Davies, who is the Network Director for Metrolink at TfGM.
“This year’s programme is one of the most significant we’ve ever undertaken and will strengthen the whole network. Whilst we complete this work, we will introduce a temporary timetable change that will run between spring and autumn.
“We know that some of this work will mean temporary disruption, and I want to thank passengers for their patience while we get it done.
“But by investing now, we can reduce faults, improve day to day reliability and make sure Metrolink can keep pace with the growing number of people who depend on it every day now and for the future.”
You can find everything you need to know about this year’s tram improvement works on TfGM’s dedicated page here.
Featured Image – TfGM
News
Manchester United youngster Jack Fletcher apologises after red card for offensive language
Danny Jones
Manchester United academy player Jack Fletcher has issued an apology following his red card last autumn, having been sent off for using offensive language.
Jack – one of the two Fletcher twins and son of former Man United player and current coach, Darren – has been slapped with a six-match ban for a homophobic insult uttered on the pitch back in October.
The youngster and England youth player, who made his senior debut this past December, has also been fined £1,500 for calling another player “gay boy” in the under-21s side’s 5-2 defeat to Barnsley FC in the EFL Trophy.
Fletcher, 18, must now attend a mandatory face-to-face education as well. Following confirmation of the reasoning behind the dismissal, which was initially unclear, he has also shared an official statement apologising for his behaviour.
🚨 Jack Fletcher banned for SIX games following his red card at Barnsley in the EFL Trophy earlier this season.
He admitted to a charge that he acted in an improper manner/and or used abusive/and or insulting words to the match official.#MUFC
As shared via the Football Association (FA) and Man United, Fletcher said: “I am truly sorry for the offensive word I used in the heat of the moment. “I completely understand [that] such language is unacceptable and immediately apologised after the game.”
He also went on to say that “a momentary lapse of character absolutely does not reflect my beliefs or values”, insisting that he meant no offence to the queer community in the moment.
Fletcher told the FA that he’d been thrown to the floor in the fixture and that his Achilles had been ‘stamped on’ by the same opponent earlier in the knockout clash.
The disciplinary commission accepted his response, but still believed the six-match ban was required as sufficient punishment, which will be served in the youth ranks.
Should he ‘reoffend’ or fail to complete the compulsory training issued by the FA, he will face further suspension and more serious penalties.
In the aftermath of his apology, United’s officially recognised LGBTQIA+ fan group have also shared a reply of their own, adding: “We hope Jack learns from this and grows as a person and a player,” it said. His immediate regret and guilty plea suggest that he will.”
As for his employers, the club wrote online: “Manchester United has worked with Jack to strengthen his understanding of discriminatory language and why it is harmful.
“In addition to his ongoing participation in regular Academy programmes on diversity and inclusion, Jack will also take part in educational training through the FA.”
With Jack’s brother, Tyler, also having featured in the matchday squad for the men’s first team, and his dad, Darren, still currently coaching the U18s team, you can most likely still expect all the Fletcher boys to remain in United’s future plans.