Assets of Community Value


In 2011 the Government introduced legislation aimed at empowering the citizen with a simple means of formally identifying assets of importance to their community and to place a marker upon them which would mean that in the event of the owner wishing to sell that asset, the community would be allowed the opportunity to make a bid to buy the asset.

This special status asset is known as an "Asset of Community Value", often shortened to "ACV" and the ability to make a bid for an asset is known as the "Community Right to Bid". The Localism Act 2011 requires the local authority to maintain a Register of Assets of Community Value.

Public houses were one of the categories of asset whose importance to local communities the Government foresaw as being prime candidates for Asset of Community Value status. 
Until May 2017, public houses were covered by what are known as "Permitted Development Rights". These allowed certain changes of use for pub buildings without the requirement for planning permission. Such changes of use outside the local authority planning regime denied the local community the opportunity to have its say over the closure of pub to become, say, a small supermarket.

However, once registered as an Asset of Community Value, the special status enjoyed by assets on the Register over-rode the "Permitted Development Rights" and placed the asset within the modest protctive blanket of the local planning regime. This did not mean that changes of use were not possible but simply that those wishing to undertake them would require planning permission to do so.

At a national level, the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) saw an opportunity to use Asset of Community Value registration as a means of giving local people the opportunity to give:

i)  pubs some protection by means of inclusion within the local planning environment;
ii) local people the opportunity to have their say as to the future of a valued community asset;
iii) local community groups the opportunity to make a bid on a such a pub to retain it as a community owned asset.  

In response to an increasing number of local pub closures, the Nottingham Branch of CAMRA decided in Autumn 2015 to formalise its approach towards the protection of pubs within its Branch Area by means of Asset of Community Value registrations.

In May 2017, the Government removed "Permitted Development Rights" from public houses and placed them within local authority planning control. Whilst this has removed the need to use Asset of Community Value regstration solely to protect a pub from "Permitted Development" changes of use, the Asset of Community Value still has an important role for those who wish to protect their local pub.

Asset of Community Value Registration for a pub still:

a) gives the local community the opportunity to bid for an ACV pub should it come up for sale;
b) acts as a reminder to Councils, planners and pub owners that the pub is a valued local community asset;
c) may act as a material planning consideration.

Discretionary Behaviour in the Provision of a Statutory Obligation

There is no doubting the generosity of spirit in which the Community Right to Bid was intended.

It is clear to those who wish to use its provisions to protect Community Assets, whatever those assets may be, that Parliament sought to empower small groups of ordinary people with the realistic prospect of protecting the widest possible range of potential assets in a simple and largely cost-free way. 

At the same time the legislation sought to limit the burden on the owner of a Community Asset until such time as the owner sought to sell that asset.

The simplicity of the tests required to achieve Asset of Community Value status and the wide range of possible interpretations for key phrases such as "community" , "social wellbeing" and "social interests" and the lack of rigorous definitions would seem to support this view.  

At the same time, the legislation put the burden of administration onto those local authorities with a statutory obligation to manage the scheme at a local level.

The vagueness of the provisions of the Act and the Regulations in defining how local authorities were to interpret the legislation has unfortunately led to something of a post code lottery in the provision of this statutory obligation as each authority moulds what it has been given in its own image.

Where operated by largely sympathetic local authorities, the Community Right to Bid has given the citizen the kind of empowerment intended by Parliament. However, it is equally clear that the loose drafting of the right to bid has been used by other local authorities to deny citizens access to those very same rights.

Those working to use the legislation to protect public houses England will aware that some Councils have, for whatever reason, sought to place the Registration of Assets of Community Value beyond the reach of the lay citizen. Whether for political or administrative purposes, some seem to have sought to create tests designed to exclude all but a small number of "special pubs", or conversely consider only those at imminent risk of closure. Other have sought to exclude certain citizen groups as being ineligible nominators. 

Much as the citizen knows that double yellow lines on a road in Penzance have essentially the same meaning as those in Berwick-upon-Tweed, a similar level of consistency in the application of the Community Right to Bid is required across England if the public are to enjoy a broadly similar ability to protect their pub.

The Nottingham Branch of CAMRA urges the Government to review the Act and the Regulations with a view to achieving a greater consistency in the delivery of the provisions of the Community Right to Bid.

At the time of writing it would seem that there is far too much discretionary behaviour in the delivery of a statutory obligation.

Branch Register of Assets of Community Value

The Nottingham Branch of CAMRA maintains a Branch Register of Assets of Community Value (ACV). Click the image to open the document:

This register shows all local pub ACVs the Nottingham branch of CAMRA was aware of at the time the register was compiled. This shows ACVs nominated by the Branch and by other eligible groups and organisations, including Parish Councils.

The register also shows which of the 6 local authorities which operate within the Nottingham Branch Area are responsible for the ACV Registration.

The Branch also maintains details of Pub ACVs for local pubs on CAMRA's pub-finder website "Whatpub". Each pub entry has an "Historical Interest" section, and details of ACV listing and rejections are given there. 

Local Authority Registers of Assets of Community Value

The Localism Act 2011 requires each relevant Local authority to maintain a Register of Assets of Community Value. Similarly, a Register of Unsuccessful Nomiations is also required. Some authorities combine the two. Each of the 6 Local Authorities operating within the Nottingham Branch Area make these available via the internet. Not all the Register can be accessed directly by web-link but those below will get you to a webpage from which you can access the local authority's register.
Nottingham Branch Area Local Authority ACV Registers
Item Local Authority Link
1 Ashfield District Council Ashfield District Council Statutory Register of  ACVs
2 Broxtowe Borough Council Broxtowe Borough Council Statutory Register of ACVs 
3 Gedling Borough Council Gedling Borough Council Statutory Register of ACVs
4 Newark & Sherwood District Council Newark & Sherwood District Council Statutory Register of ACVs
5 Nottingham City Council  Nottingham City Council Statutory Register of ACVs
6 Rushcliffe Borough Council Rushcliffe Borough Council Statutory Register of ACVs

Unfortunately, the Localism Act does not oblige our Local Authorities to present information in the Statutory Registers in a standard manner and the user may notice some considerable variation between them and the way they are presented. 

Sometimes "List of Assets of Community Value" is abbreviated to "LACV".

The Law

Any community group interested in protecting a local community asset will make its task easier by understanding as much of the legal framework as possible. Whilst this can be quite dry reading, it is useful to have access to the various documents the Government has produced. These have been brought together to give the ACV Nominator a legal tool kit.

Asset of Community Value Policy Statement - September 2011

This policy statement from the Department for Communities and Local Government sought to address some of the issues raised during consideration of provisions at Lords Committee stage of the Localism Bill. It sets out the then Government's way forward on the issues following the consultation on the Community Right to Buy - assets of community value which had ended on 3 May 2011. It helps to give some context to the provisions laid out in the final legislation enacted by Parliament. Click the image to open the document

Localism Act 2011 ("The Act")

The legislation which defines the rights of the citizen and community groups with regard to Assets of Community Value and the Community Right to Bid is the Localism Act 2011. The relevant elements are found in Part 5, Chapter 3 in Section 87 to Section 108 on pages 91 to 102. Click the image to open the document:

The Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 ("The Regulations")

This was further clarified by Statutory Instrument 2012 No. 2421, The Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012. Click the image to open the document: 


Community Right to Bid: - Non-Statutory Advice Note for Local Authorities - October 2012

Following the issue of the Regulations in September 2012, the Government issued a non-statutory advice note for local authorities. This is well worth reading because it is addressed to those organisations which decide whether or not a given asset will be registered. The more the would be pub nominator understands the basic process the better armed they will be for the inevitable hiccoughs along the way. Click the image to open the document:

The View of Government & Parliament

Other than passing the Act and the Regulations, the Government and Parliament have given their views on public houses as Assets of Communtiy Value in two additional documents which those wishing to nominate pubs for ACV status will find helpful.

Written Statement to Parliament - 26th January 2015

On the 26th January 2015 the then Pubs Minister, Kris Hopkins, made a Written Statement to Parliament. Well worth a read because it gives the then Government's view of pubs and how the public should seek to protect those they value. It also announced the removal of permitted development rights for public houses which were registered as Assets of Community Value. This represented a tremendous leap forward for the citizen's ability to protect a local pub because it ensured that the pub would be wrapped in the modest protective blanket of the local authority's planning regime. It was this Written Statement which kick started CAMRA's national Asset of Community Value programme in 2015. Click the image to open the document:

Assets of Community Value - House of Commons Library - Briefing Paper - 06366 - 26th April 2017

On the 26th April 2017, the House of Commons Library issued a briefing paper entitled "Assets of Community Value". This very helpful document has 3 main areas of interest which help show the kind of guidance your MP has received:

(i) How the Community Right to Bid works;
(ii) Constituency issues MPs ought ot be aware of and
(iii) Additional community land and asset schemes, such as the "Community Right to Reclaim Land" and "Community Asset Transfer" but which are not part of the Community Right to Bid.  Click the image to open the document:

Key Principles

The Localism Act 2011 operates on a number of key principles. If an Asset of Community Value nomination refers to these principles and cross-references these into the Act and the Regulations, then it helps the local authority to confirm that the nominated asset passes the tests required of an Asset of Community Value.

Regulation 1 - Citation, Commencement, Application & Interpretation

Regulation 2 - Lists of Assets of Community Value

Regulation 3 - Land Which May Not Be Listed

Schedule 1 of the Regulations lists types of land and buildings which are not of community value and therefore may not be listed as an ACV. Useful to know.
Regulation 4 - Definition of Local Connection [s 89(2)(b)(iii) of the Act]

4.1 A body other than a Parish Council has a local connection with land in a local authority's area if the body's activities are wholly or partly concerned with either (i) the local authority's area or (ii) with a neighbouring authority's area.

So, either an Unincorporated Group or a Local CAMRA Branch must undertake some or all of its activities in the same local authority area as the nominated asset or in a neighbouring local authority area. Demonstrate your local connection by (i) listing out your activities and show how they relate to the local athority area, (ii) listing out the post code area where your members live and show the number of members living in each post code area.

4.2 A Parish Council is presumed to have a local connection by virtue of its relationship with the local authority area or a neighbouring local authority area. 

Useful text for a nominating Parish Council: "The Parish Council of [Parish Name] is a statutory local authority established under the Local Government Act 1972. It operates in the area of the defined civil parish of [Parish Name]. Regulation 4 of the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 and section 89(2)(b)(iii) of the Localism Act 2011 presume that a Parish Council has a Local Connection with its Civil Parish Area.

Regulation 5 - Voluntary or Community Bodies

Useful text for a nominating Parish Council: "The civil parish is the most local unit of government in England. A Parish Council is a statutory local authority established under the Local Government Act 1972. For the purposes of Regulation 5 of the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 and section 89(2)(b)(iii) of the Localism Act 2011, “a voluntary or community body” includes a Parish Council."

Regulation 6 - Contents of Community Nominations

Regulation 7 - Procedure When Considering Whether to List Land - 8 week turn-around

The local authority must decide if the nominated asset is an ACV within 8 weeks of receiving the nomination. If the local authority has not made a decision within this 8-week period, it is perfectly reasonable to remind the local authority that they are in breach of Regulation 7. 

Regulation 8 - Procedure When Considering Whether to List Land - Notification of Receipt of a Nomination

The local authority must advise the local parish council, the property owner, leaseholder or lawful occupier it is considering an ACV nomination on a given piece of land.

Regulation 9 - Notice of Inclusion or Removal

Regulation 10 - Procedure to be Followed for a Listing Review

Regulation 11 - Appeal Against a Listing Review Decision

Regulation 12 - Community Interest Groups

Regulation 13 - Moratorium

Regulation 14 - Compensation

s 87 - List of Assets of Community Value

s 88 - Land of Community Value

s 89 - Procedure for Including Land in the List

s 90 - Procedure on Community Nominations

s 91 - Notice of Inclusion or Removal

s 92 - Review of Decision to Include Land in the List

s 93 - List of Land Nominated by Unsuccessful Community Nominations

s 94 - Publication and Inspection of Lists

s 95 - Moratorium

s 96 - Meaning of Relevant Disposal

s 97 - Publicising Receipt of Notice under Section 95(2)

s 98 - Informing the Owner of a Request to be Treated as a Bidder

s 99 - Compensation

s 100 - Local Land Charge

s 101 - Enforcement

s 102 - Cooperation

s 103 - Advice and Assistance in Relation to Land of Community Value in England

s 104 - Advice and Assistance in Relation to Land of Community Value in Wales

s 105 - Crown Application

s 106 - Meaning of "Local Authority"

s 107 - Meaning of "Owner"

s 108 - Interpretation of Chapter - General


Basic Requirements

In order to help those interested in nominating their local pub for an ACV registration, there are a number of basic requirements or tests which will need to be satisfied and those are explained below:

21 Local Electors 

One of the Basic Requirements is that any unincorporated nominating group of individuals should consist of at least 21 local electors. An elector is considered "local" if they are on the electoral roll in the local authority area in which the asset or pub is located. For those considering forming an unincorporated group to nominate a pub for ACV Registration in the Nottingham Branch Area need to be mindful that depending upon where the pub is located will determine which local authority electors are acceptable as part of a nominating group. The table below uses the boundaries of local authority maps to confirm which local authorities neighbour which others in the Branch Area, with the neighbours rotating clockwise around the given authority from a "12 o'clock North" position.
Local Electors in the Nottingham Branch Area
Item Pub / Asset in: Electors in the Registering Local Authority plus those in Neighbouring Local Authorities:
1 Ashfield DC Ashfield DC: plus Mansfield, Newark & Sherwood DC, Gedling BC, Nottingham CC, Broxtowe BC, Amber Valley and Bolsover
2 Broxtowe BC Broxtowe BC: plus Ashfield DC, Nottingham City, Rushcliffe BC, Erewash, Amber Valley.
3 Gedling BC Gedling BC: plus Mansfield, Newark & Sherwood DC, Ruchcliffe BC, Nottingham CC, Ashfield DC
4 Newark & Sherwood DC Newark & Sherwood DC: plus Bassetlaw, West Lindsey, North Kesteven, South Kesteven, Melton BC, Rushcliffe BC, Gedling BC, Ashfield DC and Mansfield.
5 Nottingham City Nottingham City: plus Gedling BC, Rushcliffe BC, Broxtowe BC and Ashfield DC
6 Rushcliffe BC Rushcliffe BC: plus Newark & Sherwood DC, Melton BC, Charnwood, North West Leicestershire, Erewash, Broxtowe BC and Nottingham City

The East Midlands Councils have produced a helpful map of East Midlands Councils relationships to each other, although less helpfully the colours chosen have left the borders for Nottinghamshire's local authorities rather indistinct.

Collecting the Names of 21 Local Electors

The Act does not require an unincorported nominating group:
  • to provide the local authority with a list of of the electors supporting the ACV nomination or
  • to have come together for any other purpose than simply to nominate the asset in question.
However, it is arguably helpful to provide a list along with a statement of the purpose of the unincorporated group to make it clear to the local authority that the nominating group is eligible to make the nomination.

BEWARE! Ensure that you advise the local authority that the list of supporters is for Council use only. The Nottingham Branch of CAMRA has had one case where the local authority gave the list of supporters for one ACV nomination to the pub owner, who then set about knobbling the unincorporated group. This resulted in the local authority rejecting the nomination. Clearly, this particular Council failed in its duty of care to protect the identities of the ACV supporters and the Branch is still considering whether to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office.

The easiest way to collect the names of supporters is to use a standard pack, a little like that for a petition.
Attached is a proforma, the front page of which explains the purpose of the unincorporated group. Name, Address and Post Code help to confirm the place on the relevant electoral roll. The e-mail address is useful for the nominator to use to keep the members of the unincorprated group informed as to progress. Click on the Image, Save on your computer and edit accordingly.

GO LARGE! Although the Act only requires 21 Local Electors to support an ACV nomination, the more supporters your ACV nomination has, the better. The larger the number of supporters, the greater the demonstration of local support for the ACV listing. Be ambitious and aim for 100. See achieving 21 supporters as merely the start point. It also means that if any of your supporters turn out to be ineligible to be a member of your unincorporated group, you've plenty of others in reserve!

A Local Connection

Social Wellbeing

Sections 88(1) and 88(2) require that an Asset of Community Value must further the social wellbeing of the community, or must have done so in the recent past and it must be realistic to think that it can continue to do so.

Social wellbeing is not defined by either the Act or the Regulations. However, the Government has helped here with Kris Hopkins MP's Written Statement to Parliament dated 26th January 2015. Hopkins was the then Community Pubs Minister, who confirmed that in the view of Government, public houses:
  •  “play an important role in our local communities"

  •  "provide valuable local hubs that strengthen community relationships and encourage wider social interaction"

  • are "estimated to contribute £80,000 to the economy annually".

  • were the most popular assets for ACV status  “We welcome the fact that people across the country have come together to nominate over 600 pubs, making pubs the most listed type of asset.”

  • should have ACVs placed on them before they were under threat “We urge communities to consider which pubs they wish to see protected before they are at risk.”

These are important aspects of the social wellbeing furthered by a pub and the Government's views on ACV status for pubs, so build it into your ACV Nomination Form and quote Kris Hopkins' Written Statement to Parliament dated the 26th January 2015. A copy of the full Written Statement is given above.

Generally, public houses provide a safe and convivial environment in which people may enjoy social intercourse and engage in social activities which they may not be able to do elsewhere. This is particularly important to those members of the community who might otherwise experience forms of loneliness and the associated sense of social exclusion this may bring. This interaction may help to build a sense of belonging, a fundamental building block in the development of a recognisable community. This in turn may lead to a greater social cohesiveness, binding different elements of local society together. This inevitabley leads to public houses contributing to the economic well-being of the local area.

Judge Warren (Gabriel Properties v Lewisham LBC) [CR/2014/0011] "I have no doubt that licensed premises are capable of furthering the social wellbeing and social interests of the local community."

Judge Warren (Hawthorne Leisure Acquisition v Northumberland County Council) [CR/20014/0012] noted that pubs  "encouraged friendships, conversation and the mixing of classes and generations". These are positive things which contribute to the social wellbeing of the residents of the local community. Make this connection to your nominated pub on the ACV Nomination Form and quote Judge Warren and the case details.

Judge Lane (Hawthorn Leisure Limited v St. Edmondsbury Borough Council) [CR/ 2015/0018] noted that the pub “was a social meeting place, as well as playing a part in village activities.”

Judge Findlay (Collins v Derbyshire Dales District Council) [CR/2016/0005] observed that "the building is currently in use as a public house and is a venture which provides somewhere for village residence to meet and socialise. It acts as a place when people to interact with others from the local area to ensure a cohesive community and a village pub of this type meets the statutory test.”

Judge Hughes (Admiral Taverns Limited v Cheshire West and Chester) [CR/2016/0022] it “is clear from the information before me that the premises have been used by local people as part of their social lives, meeting others in a convivial atmosphere for food and drink and furthermore holding some social events, notably quiz nights.” 

The contribution made to social wellbeing by public houses is discussed in two academic reports which are available below. These are well worth a read. Connect the findings of these reports to your pub on your ACV Nomination Form and submit them as supporting documents.  

(1) “Pubs & Places – the Social Value of Community Pubs” by Rick Muir and published by the Institute for Public Policy Research in January 2012 and

(2) “Friends on Tap – The Role of the Pub at Heart of the Community” by Prof. Robin Dunbar of Oxford University and published by CAMRA.

Click on the images to open the documents:

A further helpful piece of research comes from the Campaign to End Loneliness, which found in a recent survey that 17% of lonely over-65 year olds cited going to the pub as being one of the things they missed most.

Social Interests

Sections 88(1) and 88(2) require that an Asset of Community Value must further the social interests of the community, or must have done so in the recent past and it must be realistic to think that it can continue to do so. Section 88(6) of the Act sets out very helpfully three examples of social interests which may be met by an Asset of Community Value:

“social interests” includes (in particular) each of the following— (a) cultural interests; (b) recreational interests; (c) sporting interests;

From the point of view of obtaining ACV status for a pub this is very helpful. Public houses have been an important part of British cultural life for centuries. People go to pubs for recreational activities and very often a local pub will offer traditional pub games or may even have sports teams. These you should include in your ACV Nomination Form. Point out that s88(6) explicitly includes cultural, recreational and sporting interests.

However, these are not the only valid social interests which a public house may serve. Others might include:

Heritage interests = Has your nominated pub been a key part of your community for a long period of time? If so, research its history. 19th century trade directories will often take you back the best part of 200 years and the University of Leicester has a useful on-line resource. See how far back you can go and build in that date and the publican's name to your nomination. Are there any local history books or websites with useful information? If so, don't forget to quote your source. Is it a listed building on Historic England's National List? Is it on CAMRA's National or Local Heritage lists for its preserved historic interior? Is it in a local authority Conservation Area? Is it on the local authority's Local Heritage List? Where a pub is recognised for its heritage it ought to be delf-evident that the pub meets the heritage interests of the local community.

Retail interests = Does your pub act as a local shop or a post office? Does it serve a range of real ales and/or real ciders? Does it have changing guest real ale and guest real ciders, this giving the local community a chance to try drinks from other parts of the country they might not otherwise have the opportunity to try? 

Some Example Social Interests

Real Ale

The pub provides Real Ale, which is beer brewed from traditional ingredients (malted barley, hops water and yeast), matured by secondary fermentation in the container from which it is dispensed, and served without the use of extraneous carbon dioxide. Brewers use ingredients which are fresh and natural, resulting in a drink which tastes natural and full of flavour. It is literally living as it continues to ferment in the cask, developing its flavour as it matures ready to be poured into the glass. This contributes to both the recreational and cultural interests of the community.

Does it have regular real ales and does it have guest beers, the choice meeting the retail interests of the community. If so, put this on the ACV Nomination Form. 

Judge N.J. Warren (St Gabriel Properties v Lewisham LBC) [CR/2014/0011] where the owner of the Windmill rather bizarrely submitted "that a pub cannot further “the social wellbeing” of a community and that the Windmill harmed the social wellbeing of Lewisham because of the dangers of alcohol and the need to reduce drinking....This is a surprising submission from a company which has owned and been running a pub.  I reject it.  No one can doubt that alcohol has its dangers.  Equally, I have no doubt that licensed premises are capable of furthering the social wellbeing and social interests of the local community."

Realistic Continuation of Community Use

Ancillary v Non-ancillary

This has been something of a problem, particularly for those unfamiliar with the meaning of the words.  Indeed, the Nottingham Branch has dealt with one local authority which rejected a number of perfectly good pub ACVs because the reviewing staff thought that the meaning of the word ancillary was the definition of non-ancillary and vice versa!

So, it is perhaps worthwhile to outline the difference in your ACV Nomination Form:

Eg. "The definition of “Non-ancillary” is a primary purpose or activity. The primary purposes of a public house include those permitted activities licensed by [Local Authority Name].This meets the requirement for the [Pub Name] to serve the social wellbeing and social interests of the local community.
This primary (ie. Non-ancillary) purpose also includes providing a place for people to meet and socialise and to eat and drink. This meets the requirement for the [Pub Name] to serve the social wellbeing and social interests of the local community."

You can enhance this point by obtaining details of the pub's licence from the local authority. Afterall, if the local authority which is going to decide on whether or not your nominated pub is an ACV is the same one that has licensed that very same pub, it can hardly argue it doesn't know whether or not that pub serves the social wellbeing and social interests of the local community.

Eg. "The [Pub Name] was issued with premises licence [Premises Licence Number] under the name of [Licence Applicant] by [Local Authority Name] on the [Date]."

You should be able to get licensing information direct from the Licensing Authority. If you decide to get this information by Freedom of Information Request, it is worth going back in time for, say 5 or 10 years.


Nomination Forms and Some Helpful Suggestions

There are several "standard" formats for ACV Nomination Forms, one of which the aspiring ACV Nominator will need to complete and send to the relevant local authority. These different formats don't necessarily ask the same questions, so it is as well to run through the form a number of times to get the logic of how the local authority is structuring its request for information. It is also worth reading through the Council's notes and any procedural guidance available on its website. 

Whilst these suggestions are intended to give the would be Nominator some guidance, the more tailored the information on the ACV Nomination Form is to local circumstances the better.

  • To make things easier for you as Nominator, obtain an electronic version of the ACV Nomination Form from the Council's website. Most Councils will make one available in Word format. This way you can cut, paste, save and edit as much as you like. A typed ACV Nomination Form is nice and easy to read compared to some handwriting, so make things easy for the Council officers who will assess the form.
  • For unincorporated groups, use a simple group name which connects directly with your nominated asset. Eg. If the pub you'd like to list as an ACV is called the Limping Flamingo, call your unincorporated group The Friends of the Limping Flamingo.
  • Create a Header for each page of the form with the pub's name and address. Occasionally hard copy pages go missing or get lost and it is helpful for a Council to know exactly what that loose page belongs to.
  • Similarly, create a Footer which has your Unincorporated Group / CAMRA Branch / Parish Council name and hosts the page numbers. 
  • When beginning a paragraph, get the pub name and location into the text so that all through the ACV Nomination Form it is clear to any reader that you are relating the subject of the text to your nominated community asset. When using the pub name, give it added emphasis by typing it in bold italics.  Eg. "The Flying Fox on Gotham Lane in Batston serves the social wellbeing and meets the social interests of the local community in the village of Batston......."
  • Similarly, use your Unincorporated Group / CAMRA Branch / Parish Council name as often as possible. It may seem repetitive but you are nominating an Asset of Community Value, not competing with Jane Austen. Make it clear your group's connection to the pub and why not give emphasis to your group name too. Eg. "The Friends of the Ardvaark's Arms is an unincorporated group of 65 residents of Little Dripping, who are all electors on the electoral roll of Upper Gumtree District Council. The Friends of the Ardvaark's Arms have come together for the sole purpose of meeting the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and The Asset of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 to nominate the Ardvaark's Arms in Little Dripping as an Asset of Community Value." For CAMRA Branches, make sure you use your full branch name as that connects you to the local area, Don't just call yourselves "CAMRA", even in the body of the text. Make it clear your local people in a local group.
  • Where possible submit your ACV nomination by e-mail on a normal working day, preferably in the morning. Take the date you send the e-mail as the Nomination Date and let the Council know that in your e-mail. Your 8 week countdown to a Council response begins on the Nomination Date and it is important that both the nominating group and the local authority are aware of this.
  • Your e-mail submission should state the name and address of the nominated asset  in both the subject line and as a bold header fronting the e-mail text and who you are. It should also have a copy of the ACV Nomination Form attached and any additional documents you are submitting, which you should list so the Council will know if they are missing any. Start the e-mail with a formal "Dear Sirs" or "Dear Sir/Madam" and finish with a "Yours Faithfully".
  • If you have lots of documents to submit, rather than risk being rejected by a Council's firewall, you could send more than one e-mail. Use the same basic text for each but modify them re attachments. Mark them up "E-mail 1 of X" etc etc 


Christopher Cant

A useful guide to the legal cases concerning ACVs has been prepared and updated by the emminent property barrister, Christopher Cant.

In what might otherwise be a rather dry subject, Mr Cant's guide is refreshingly readable. Highly recommended for those embarking upon an ACV Nomination, it is available on Mr Cant's website:

At the time of writing, the latest version was the 6th Edition:

Assets of Community Value Guide  (6th Edition) 8th June 2018


Useful Quotes from Case Law and Government Guidance

Case law (see Useful Cases below) and Government Guidance gives a host of useful quotes and examples which the citizen can use to reinforce the case
the ACV Nomination Form makes to a local authority.


Useful Cases

The following legal cases are helpful and the links will take you through to the judgements on the British and Irish Legal Information Institute (BAILII) website.

These are useful because the cases can give helpful arguments as to why your pub is also an Asset of Community Value. Use the agrument used by the judge referenced into the legal case using the case name, the pub name (if the case is about a pub), the judge's name and the case number as part of your justification. This will enhance your ACV nomination.

First Tier Tribunal Cases (General Regulatory Chamber):

CR/2013/0003 - Spirit Pub Company Limited v Rushmoor Borough Council and the Friends of Tumbledown Dick - Judge N.J.Warren - re the Tumbledown Dick, Farnborough

CR/2013/0005 - Patel v Hackney London Borough Council - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Chesham Arms, Hackney 

CR/2013/0007 - Reed v Shropshire County Council - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Pheasant, Lindley Brook                                                                                                                                                                   
CR/2014/0005 - Worthy Developments Limited & Forest of Dean District Council & Save Our Sun Committee - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Rising Sun, Woodcroft

CR/2014/0007 - Scott v South Norfolk District Council & Pulham St. Mary Parish Council - Judge N.J. Warren - King's Head, Pulham St. Mary

CR/2014/0008 - Sawtel v Mid-Devon District Council & Crediton Parish Council - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Mare & Foal (Station Hotel), Yeoford

CR/2014/0010 - Crostone Limited v Amber Valley Borough Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Black Swan, Idridgehay

CR/2014/0011 - Gabriel Properties Limited v Lewisham London Borough Council & SE London CAMRA - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Windmill, Sydenham

CR/2014/0012 - Hawthorne Leisure Acquisitions Limited v Northumberland County Council - Judge N.J. Warren - re the Black Bull, Lowick

CR/2014/0014 - Moat v North Lincolnshire District Council and Keadby & Althorpe Parish Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Dolphin, Althorpe

CR/2014/0015 - Evenden Estates v Brighton & Hove City Council and Rose Hill Tavern Action Group - Judge Peter Lane - re Rose Hill Tavern, Brighton

CR/2014/0019 - Gibson v Babergh District Council & Thorpe Morieux Parish Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Bull Inn, Thorpe Morieux

CR/2015/0002 - Trouth v Shropshire County Council & Caynham Village Hall Committee - Judge Peter Lane - re Caynham Village Hall Car Park & Playing Fields

CR/2015/0006 - Chadwick v Rossendale Borough Council - Judge Peter Lane - re Bacup Conservative Club

CR/2015/0008 - Haley (Old Boot Inn) v West Berkshire District Council & Re-Boot Community Pub - Judge Peter Lane - re the Old Boot, Stanford Dingley

CR/2015/0010 - STO Capital Limited v Haringey London Borough Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Alexandra, Fortis Place

CR/2015/0011 - Pullan v Leeds City Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Old Cock, Otley

CR/2015/0012 - Kicking Horse Limited v Camden London Borough Council & Belsize Residents Association- Judge Peter Lane - re the Sir Richard Steele, Haverstock Hill

CR/2015/0015 - Mendoza Limited v London Borough of Camden & the Carpenters Arms Supporters - Judge Peter Lane - re the Carpenters Arms, Kings Cross Road 

CR/2015/0018 - Hawthorne Leisure Limited v St. Edmondsbury Borough Council & Friends of the Beehive - Judge Peter Lane - re Beehive, Horringer

CR/2015/0019 - Hawthorne Leisure Limited v Chiltern District Council & Great Missenden Parish Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the King's Head, Prestwood

CR/2015/0020 - Hawthorne Leisure Limited v Bracknell Forest Borough Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Royal Hunt, Ascot

CR/2015/0021 - Curtis Sloane Limited v Bassetlaw District Council and Elkesley Parish Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Robin Hood, Elkesley

CR/2015/0022 - Astim Limited v Bury Council & Ramsbottom Heritage Society - Judge Simon Bird - re Grant Arms Bowling Green, Ramsbottom

CR/2015/0023 - Singh v Leeds City Council - Judge Peter Lane - re the Shoulder of Mutton, Leeds

CR/2015/0024 - Fenwick Limited v Mid-Suffolk District Council and CAMRA Ipswih & East Suffolk Branch - Judge Simon Bird - re the Cross Keys, Henley 

CR/2015/0025 - King v Chiltern District Council & Gread Missenden Parish Council - Judge Anthony Snelson - re Pheasant, Ballinger

CR/2015/0026 - Hamna Wakaf Limited v London Borough of Lambeth & SW London CAMRA  - Judge Peter Lane - re the Grosvenor, Stockwell

CR/2016/0006 - Collins v Derbyshire Dales District Council - Judge Jacqueline Findlay - re the Three Stags Heads, Darley Bridge

CR/2016/0009 - ZB Investments v Croydon London Borough Council & Save the Ship Group - Judge Anthony Snelson - re the Ship,South Norwood

CR/2016/0010 - Neem Genie Limited v Telford & Wrekin Council and Waters Upton Parish Council - Judge Simon Bird - re the Swan Inn, Waters Upton

CR/2016/0022 - Admiral Taverns v Cheshire West & Chester Council and Farndon Parish Council - Judge Christopher Hughes - re Farndon Arms, Farndon

CR/2016/0025 - Marshall & Others v Arun District Council & C. Shore - Judge Simon Bird - re Seaview Hotel, Littlehampton

CR/2017/0007 - MacNeil UB40 Limited v London Borough of Hackney and E London & City CAMRA - Judge Jacqueline Findlay - re the Acorn, Haggerston

CR/2017/0010 - Adams v Ashfield District Council & Nottingham CAMRA - Judge Simon Bird - re Portland Arms, Hucknall

Costs & Compensation Decisions:

CR/2014/0007-2 - Scott v South Norfolk Distirct Council & Pulham St. Mary Parish Council - Judge N.J. Warren - re King's Head, Pulham St. Mary 

CR/2015/0006 - Chadwick v Rossendale Borough Council - Judge Peter Lane - re Bacup Conservative Club

CR/2016/0014 - New Barrow Limited v Ribble Valley Borough Council and Barrow Parish Council - Judge Peter Lane - re Allotments off Whalley Road 

Upper Tribunal Cases:

MISC/1976/2017 - [2018] UKUT 15 (AAC) - Admiral Taverns Limited v Cheshire West & Chester Council and Farndon Parish Council - Judge H. Levenson - re Farndon Arms, Farndon


The Judges in these cases are:

Justice Peter Lane - President of the General Regulator Chamber - Mr Justice Lane was appointed President of the First-tier Tribunal General Regulatory Chamber in 2014. Admitted as a solicitor in 1985, he was appointed a fee-paid immigration adjudicator in 1996. In 2001 he was appointed as a full-time adjudicator, becoming in 2003 a Vice President of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. From 2005 to 2010 he was a Senior Immigration Judge in the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. In 2010, he became a Judge of the Upper Tribunal, where he sits in the Immigration and Asylum and Administrative Appeals Chambers. [].

Judge Simon Bird QC - Northern Circuit - Appointed 1sy January 2012 []. QC 2009; Year of call 1987; Simon Bird specialises in planning, local government, administrative and environmental Law. He is a member of the Planning and Environmental Bar Association the National Infrastructure Planning Association and the Parliamentary Bar Mess. Past and present clients include major national house builders, port operators, international oil companies, airports, National Grid, rail freight operators, waste companies, hotel chains, executive agencies of Government, many local authorities and private clients. He has an extensive advisory, inquiry and advocacy practice. Judge of the First Tier Tribunal, General Regulatory Chamber including Environment and Asset of Community Value appeals. [].

Judge Jacqueline Findlay - Employment - Appointed 4th April 2010. []. Appointment of a Regional Tribunal Judge of the First-tier Tribunal assigned to the Social Entitlement Chamber (Social Security and Child Support) - Findlay (Thursday 12th July 2012). "The Lord Chancellor, the Right Honourable Kenneth Clarke QC MP, has appointed Jacqueline Ruth Findlay to be a Regional Tribunal Judge of the First-tier Tribunal, assigned to the Social Entitlement Chamber to exercise the Social Security and Child Support jurisdiction within that Chamber. She will be based in the North East Region with effect from 1 October 2012. Jacqueline Ruth Findlay, aged 54, will be known as Regional Tribunal Judge Findlay. She was admitted as a Solicitor in 1987. She was appointed as a Fee-paid Chairman of the Appeal Tribunals in 1997, as a District Chairman of the Appeal Tribunals in 1999 (becoming a Judge of the First-tier Tribunal, Social Entitlement Chamber in 2008) and as a Fee-paid Legal Member of the Gambling Appeal Tribunal in 2007 (becoming a Fee-paid Tribunal Judge of the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) in 2010)".[].

Judge Christopher Hughes - Employment - appointed 3rd January 2006. []

Judge Howard Levenson - Administrative Appeals - appointed 3rd November 2008. []. A Judge of the Upper Tribunal and formerly a Principal Lecturer in UEL’s Law School for many years has a career defined by his commitment to defending civil liberties. He previously worked for Liberty and has fought and won many civil rights cases, chaired a range of tribunals, and he became a Judge of the Upper Tribunal in 2008 [].

Judge Anthony Snelson - Employment - appointed 2nd May 2000. [].

Judge Nicholas John Warren - Retired - Then President of the General Regulatory Chamber, Judhe Warren retired on the 14th February 2015.Judge Warren (63) was admitted as a Solicitor in 1975. He was appointed a legally qualified panel member of the Appeal Tribunals in 1987, District Chairman of the Appeal Tribunals in 1992, an Assistant Recorder in 1992 and a Recorder in 1996. He was appointed Deputy Social Security Child Support Commissioner in 1997 and President of the Gambling Appeal Tribunal (now known as Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge (Administrative Appeals Chamber)) in 2007. He was appointed a Member of the Tribunal Procedure Rule Committee from 2009 to 2011 and President of the General Regulatory Chamber in 2011. [].  



© 2012 Nottingham CAMRA

Website design by Seahawk Studio