I was surprised the person who challenged the granting of a late licence by Brighton and Hove City Council has been ordered to pay £5,000 costs (The Argus, June 6).

This has the appearance of a hefty fine for anyone who is concerned enough about such decisions to take action because they might alter their neighbourhood's atmosphere, affect the lives of its residents and possibly reduce the value of their homes.

If I was unlucky enough to live opposite a pub which had been granted a 3am licence, it would seem I would have to factor in the possibility of being forced to pay £5,000, presumably on top of my solicitor's fees, when deciding whether or not to challenge that decision.

I can see the sense in awarding costs when a challenge is frivolous, to protect council revenues.

However, your article stated that, in this case, the council also rejected 15 letters of objection to the pub's licence.

The challenge was therefore obviously not frivolous.

There could be a threshold for the number of objections above which a challenge was deemed to be "reasonable".

Surely it is to the benefit of all the city's residents, especially those who live within vomiting distance of a pub, that someone is prepared to test the council's limits on the granting of late licenses in residential areas?

-Ed Allan, Brighton