British law 1952 Hypnotism Act

You know every now and then the 1952 Hypnotism act is mentioned on this site and it's often misquoted, misunderstood and misinterpreted but, as it is the Only legislation in the UK concerning the subject of Hypnosis and of this site I think everybody who lives and works in Britain, or who is planning to travel here, should know exactly what it says, so, here it is in full...

By the way don't try interpreting it unless you are a british Lawyer or better, a Judge. This law has never been tested in court and as One council told me back in 1995 it's doubtful it ever would be unless a hypnotist killed someone on stage.

HYPNOTISM ACT 1952
An Act to regulate the demonstration of hypnotic phenomena for purposes of public
entertainment.
[1 August 1952]
Northern Ireland. This Act does not apply.
1 Control of demonstrations of hypnotism at places licensed for public
entertainment

2 Control of demonstrations of hypnotism at other places
3 Prohibition on hypnotising persons under [eighteen]
4 Entry of premises
5 Saving for scientific purposes
6 Interpretation
7 Short title, extent and commencement
Your reference:
HOME OFFICE
Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
Liquor, Gambling and Data Protection Unit
Room 1178, 50 Queen Anne's Gate,
London SW1H 9AT
Direct Line 0171-273 3668
Facsimile 0171-273 3205

This was followed by a set of Guidelines SUGGESTING the type of restirictions that Local Authorities Could impose as conditions on such a licence. This is important - They Are Not The Law Unless They Are Written Into A Licence

Our reference: ENT/96 4691219 5 August 1996
The Chief Executive of District Councils in England
The Chief Executive of County & County Borough Councils in Wales The
Chief Executive of London Borough Councils
The Chief Executive of the Isle of Wight Council
The Town Clerk of the City of London
The Chief Officer of Police in England and Wales
HOME OFFICE CIRCULAR NO: 3911996
STAGE HYPNOTISM: REVIEW OF THE HYPNOTISM ACT 1952
This circular advises local authorities of the outcome of the Home Office's
review of the Hypnotism Act 1952 and sets out revised model conditions
which authorities are encouraged to attach to licenses for public
performances of stage hypnotism.
Background

2. On 12 December 1994 the House of Commons held an adjournment
debate to discuss public and parliamentary concern about alleged harm
suffered by some participants in public performances of stage hypnotism.
This followed a period when several cases of alleged harm had received
considerable media attention. The cases concerned both physical and
psychological effects. At the end of the debate the then Home Office
Minister, Mr Michael Forsyth, announced that a review was to be undertaken
into the workings of the Hypnotism Act 1952. The review would examine
evidence of possible harm to people taking part in public entertainmentʼs
involving hypnotism and consider the appropriateness of the present regime
of control that the Act provides, including existing arrangements for
enforcement.

3. The review of medical evidence and available research literature was
carried out by a panel of experts who were nominated by the British
Psychological Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. The panel
members were not experts in hypnosis but were appointed on the strength
of their professional expertise in the evaluation of clinical evidence and
research literature.

4. The Home Office issued a questionnaire to all local authorities in England
and Wales in March 1995 which sought information about current licensing
practice (eg, whether separate authority is required for each performance
and whether conditions are imposed), the numbers of performances taking
place and the extent to which problems have been encountered.
Almost 300 (over 70%) of the authorities replied. The Scottish Office
conducted a similar exercise and received a further 51 replies.

5. Publication of the expert panel's report was announced in Parliament on 7
November 1995. The panel concluded that there was no evidence of serious
risk to participants in stage hypnosis, and that any risk which does exist is
much less significant than that involved in many other activities. They
considered that the small potential risk which does exist could be alleviated
through applying clearer conditions to the regulation of performances and
providing more information to audiences to enable them to make an
informed choice before deciding whether to participate.

6. On 18 December 1995 the Home Office issued a consultation paper which
proposed how the recommendations of the expert panel and the issues raised by
local authorities might best be addressed, and included draft revised model
conditions.

7. We received 39 responses direct from stage hypnotists, local authorities
and other
interested parties. In addition, the Association of District Councils and the
Association of Metropolitan Authorities provided summaries of responses received
from their members.
Changes which would require legislation

8. Some of the issues arising from the review could only be addressed
through primary legislation. These are set out at paragraphs 9 - 13 below.
There is no immediate prospect of legislation to amend the 1952 Act, but we
have indicated those changes which we consider potential candidates for
legislation when an opportunity arises. In that event, any additional burden
or cost thereby imposed would have to be justified under a formal process of
compliance cost and risk assessment.
Local authority charges

9. There was general agreement in the responses to the consultation paper
that local
authorities outside London should be able to. charge a fee for granting approval for
stage hypnotism performances under the 1952 Act (such provision already exists for
London authorities). It was regarded as inequitable that where applicants do not
hold a public entertainment’s license (PEL) the local authority has to meet the
administrative and enforcement costs of licensing a commercial event from
resources which might otherwise have been spent on local services.

10. Any future legislation would need to incorporate safeguards to prevent
excessive charging. This might mean prohibiting further charges where the
venue already held an annual PEL and limiting the charge for other
approvals to no more than the cost of an occasional license.
Powers of entry

11. The 1952 Act provides a power of entry for police constables where it is
believed that a performance is taking place, or may be taking place, in
contravention of the Act. There was strong support in the responses to the
consultation paper for extending such a power to local authority officers.
Whilst the Home Office would be willing to consider such a legislative
amendment, we are content that a power of entry can effectively be
provided for now by attaching a condition to that effect when approval is
granted. Such a provision is included at Section 4(o) in the attached revised
model conditions.
Private performances

12. There was some support for extending regulatory powers to cover
private performances, but the vast majority of respondents thought the
current legislation sufficient.
Any attempt to regulate private performances would run into difficulties of
definition as well as enforcement and, given the low level of risk identified by
the review, we can see no justification for it.
Appeals procedures

13. There was also some support for incorporating a formal appeals
procedure into the legislation, but most respondents supported development
of local appeals procedures. The way in which local authorities process
applications varies enormously, some being dealt with by officers under
delegated powers whilst others are considered by councilors at committee
meetings. For an appeals mechanism to be effective it needs to reflect these
local procedures. One particular difficulty with an appeals mechanism is that
unless the appeal can be heard and a judgment made relatively quickly it
will often be too late to hold the performance whatever the outcome. Local
authorities are encouraged to develop their own appeals procedures, taking
due account of issues such as speed, the independence of the appeals
body and cost.

Improvements to the present licensing arrangements

14. One particular criticism made in the consultation was that local
authorities often have little information or understanding about the activity
they are licensing. The organisations representing stage hypnotists have
argued that hypnotists should be able to apply to a central licensing body for
an annual performance license.

15. Local authorities are responsible for all other public entertainmentʼs
licensing and were opposed to losing control of stage hypnotism licensing.
However, there was strong support for establishing a central information
point to which local authorities could refer for information on performers
whose acts had caused concern. This would save them time and resources
when considering applications. Any such information point would need to
incorporate adequate safeguards to ensure that information held was
accurately and fairly recorded.

16. It has been suggested that either the Local Authority Co-ordinating Body on
Food and Trading Standards (LACOTS) or The Local Government Licensing
Forum might be able to provide this information. The Home Office is consulting
those organisations and the local authority associations about the feasibility of such
a scheme. If a central information point is established details will be passed to
authorities through the local authority associations.
Revised model conditions

17. The model conditions annexed to this circular incorporate a number of
revisions to those included with the consultation paper issued on 18
December 1995. Our aim has been to keep administrative requirements to a
minimum and to include only those conditions that are justified by the level
of risk found by the review. It would be for individual local authorities to
include additional conditions if they thought this necessary to meet local
circumstances.

18. The main changes to the model conditions are as follows (the
references to previous sections relate to the draft model conditions attached
to the December 1995 consultation paper):
Sections 1 & 2: there is no reason why a local authority should require
hypnotists to seek specific authority for all their stage performances, even where the venue holds
a public entertainment’s licence (PEL). Local authorities are encouraged to
allow stage hypnotism to take place under the PEL as long as the model
conditions are adhered to and the authority is given adequate notice to
enable it to amend the conditions or refuse authority for a particular performance within a specified
period after notification is received. In such situations, where the local authority
may merely wish to check the hypnotist's previous experience, the required
notice period should be kept to a minimum.
The strict requirement for 28 days' notice of performances can seriously
constrain stage hypnotists' ability to accept work, by preventing them from
taking bookings at short notice. Local authorities are therefore encouraged,
even where the venue does not hold a PEL, to accept shorter notice where
possible, for example, if the hypnotist has previously performed at the venue
without problems. Advertising, ticket sales etc, cannot reasonably go ahead
until approval is granted and local authorities are encouraged to set targets
for reaching decisions quickly. Some local authorities saw no reason for
most applications to be copied to fire authorities. We have therefore left this
to local authorities' discretion.

Section 3(a): as there are no officially recognised qualifications or
organisations, we have removed the request for details of previous
experience, relevant qualifications and membership of any relevant
organisation. This has been replaced with a request for details of the
hypnotist's last three performances, to give an indication of the hypnotist's
experience and allow the authority to make any necessary checks.
Previous section 2(b): we have removed the request for a description of the
content of the proposed performance. On reflection we consider that as long
as the hypnotist abides by the model conditions it is not necessary to have
details of the exact content. It would be difficult to provide if the hypnotist is
to have some discretion to tailor the performance to the nature of the
audience. –Section

3(b): we have added a final sentence in brackets. Previous refusal of a
permission may have nothing to do with the acceptability or otherwise of the
individual hypnotist. Previous sections 3(a) & (b): these have been deleted
because they related to the prior notification of the proposed content of the
performance.

Section 4(b): the statement to be included on posters and programmes has
been revised. The purpose of the statement is to help ensure that the
audience are aware that participation remains entirely voluntary and do not
feel forced to participate against their will.
Section 4(c): we have amended the insurance cover requirement to allow for
it to be met by either the venue or the hypnotist. We have also removed the
minimum level. The relatively low level of risk identified by the review does
not necessarily justify a requirement for £1,000,000 insurance cover; local
authorities will wish to make a judgement in relation to other relevant
factors, such as the type and size of venue.
We have added a requirement for proof of insurance cover to be available
for inspection.

Section 4(e): this now makes it clear that the requirement for a line across
the stage is only necessary when the stage is raised above the level of the
auditorium. The condition also allows an exception to the prohibition on
volunteers crossing the line, where they are told to do so as part of the
performance (many performances include a participant being sent back to
their seat only to keep returning to the stage having supposedly forgotten
something).

Section 4(f): the final sentence before the suggested statement now
indicates that the statement may be amended as necessary so long as the
overall message remains the same.

Section 4(g): we have removed the prohibition on the use of inducements
because this can be interpreted very widely and is not thought to add
anything to the risks involved. The condition is now aimed exclusively at
preventing use of any form of coercion to force participation.

Section 4(h): this now relates to any requirement' for attendants to be
present specifically in relation to the hypnotism performance. Any wider
requirement for attendants should have been considered when the PEL was
issued or, if there is no PEL, can be separately considered by the local
authority and added to this condition.

Section 4(j)(i): a hypnotist may often ask volunteers to behave as if they
were a child; this is not age regression, which seeks to take the subject back
to their own childhood.
Section 4(j)(iv): we have limited the prohibition to the consumption of
harmful or noxious substances. In terms of risk to participants, there is no
reason to prevent –hypnotists from using normal edible items (onions,
lemons, etc). Previous section 3(1)(vi): this prohibited any suggestion which,
if it occurred in reality, would cause anxiety or distress. Such a condition
would prohibit many of the fanciful suggestions which hypnotists use as a
part of their act. In practice volunteers do not react as if they truly believe
that there is, for example, a giant spider behind them or a bomb under their
chair. : The opening sentence of section 40) prohibits any action which
would be likely to cause harm, anxiety or distress.

Section 4(n): the additional sentence in brackets makes it clear that the
hypnotist should not treat any problems beyond offering general
reassurance and confirmation that all suggestions have been removed.
Section 4(o): as mentioned at paragraph 1 1 above, this provides a right of
entry for local authority officers. Refusal would amount to a breach of the
conditions and therefore an offence under the 1952 Act. Any future
legislation to include a general power of entry for local authority officers
could extend this power to cases where a performance is taking place in
contravention of the Act, whether or not approval had been sought.

Enquiries
Please address any comments or questions arising from this circular to:
David Dipple
Liquor, Gambling & Data Protection Unit
Home Office
Room 1183
50 Queen Anne's Gate
LONDON SW1P 9AT
Tel: 0171 273 3158

The Annex to Home Office Circular No 4211989 is hereby superseded.
MRS J M FLASCHNER
Annex to Home Office Circular No 3911996
MODEL CONDITIONS TO BE ATTACHED TO LICENSES FOR THE
PERFORMANCE OF STAGE HYPNOTISM
Consents
1 . Any exhibition, demonstration or performance (hereafter referred to as a
"performance") of hypnotism (as defined in the Hypnotism Act 1952) on any
person requires the express written consent of the licensing authority and
must comply with any attached conditions. The authority may consent either
under the terms of a public entertainmentʼs licence or under the provisions
of the Hypnotism Act 1952. Applications

3. An application for consent under condition 1 shall be in writing and signed
by the applicant or his agent and shall normally be made not less than 28
days in advance of the performance concerned. This period may be reduced
in the case of a hypnotist who has performed at the same venue within the
last three years without any problems occurring. The authority will normally
respond within 7-14 days; less where the hypnotist has previously
performed at the same venue. The applicant must at the same time forward
a copy of the application to the chief officer of police; and the authority may
also copy it to the local fire authority if it considers this necessary.
The application shall contain the following:
the name (both real and stage, if different) and address of the person who
will give the performance (hereafter referred to as the "hypnotist"), along
with details of their last three performances (where and when); and a
statement as to whether, and if so giving full details thereof, the hypnotist
has been previously refused, or had withdrawn, a consent by any licensing
authority or been convicted of an offence under the Hypnotism Act 1952 or
of an offence involving the breach of a condition regulating or prohibiting the
giving of a performance of hypnotism on any person at a place licensed for
public entertainment. (Refusal of consent by another authority does not
necessarily indicate that the particular hypnotist is unacceptable and will not
of itself prejudice the application.)
Conditions

4. The following conditions shall apply to any consent given:
Publicity
no poster, advertisement or programme for the performance which is likely
to cause public offence shall be displayed, sold or supplied, by or on behalf
of the licensee either at the premises or elsewhere;
every poster, advertisement or programme for the performance which is
displayed, sold or supplied shall include, clearly and legibly, the following
statement:
"Volunteers, who must be aged 18 or over, can refuse at any point to
continue taking part in the performance."
Insurance
(c) the performance shall be covered to a reasonable level by public liability
insurance. The hypnotist must provide evidence of this to the local authority
if requested; and it must be available for inspection at the performance;
Physical arrangements
(d) the means of access between the auditorium and the stage for
participants shall be properly lit and free from obstruction;
(e) a continuous white or yellow line shall be provided on the floor of any
raised stage at a safe distance from the edge. This line shall run parallel
with the edge of the stage for its whole width. The hypnotist shall inform all
subjects that they must not cross the line while under hypnosis, unless
specifically told to do so as a part of the Performance;
Treatment of audience and subjects
(f) before starting the performance the hypnotist shall make a statement to
the audience, in a serious manner, identifying those groups of people who
should not volunteer to participate in it; explaining what volunteers might be
asked to perform; informing the audience of the possible risks from
embarrassment or anxiety; and emphasising that subjects may cease to
participate at any time they wish. The following is a suggested statement,
which might be amended as necessary to suit individual styles so long as
the overall message remains the same:
"I shall be looking for volunteers aged over 18 who are willing to be
hypnotised and participate in the show. Anyone who comes forward should
be prepared to take part in a range of entertaining hypnotic suggestions but
can be assured that they will not be asked to do anything which is indecent,
offensive or harmful. Volunteers need to be in normal physical and. mental
health and I must ask that no-one volunteers if they have a history of mental
illness, are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs or are pregnant."
No form of coercion shall be used to persuade members of the audience to
participate in the performance. In particular, hypnotists shall not use
selection techniques which seek to identify and coerce onto the stage the
most suggestible members of the audience without their prior knowledge of
what is intended. Any use of such selection techniques (eg, asking members
of the audience to clasp their hands together and asking those who cannot
free them again to come onto the stage) should only be used when the
audience is fully aware of what is intended and that participation is entirely
voluntary at every stage;
If volunteers are to remain hypnotised during an interval in the performance,
a reasonable number of attendants as agreed with the licensing authority
shall be in attendance throughout to ensure their safety;
Prohibited actions
The performance shall be so conducted as not to be likely to cause offence
to any person in the audience or any hypnotised subject; the performance
shall be so conducted as not to be likely to cause harm, anxiety or distress
to any person in the audience or any hypnotised subject. In particular, the
performance shall not include:
any suggestion involving the age regression of a subject (ie, asking the
subject to revert to an earlier age in their life; this does not prohibit the
hypnotist from asking subjects to act as if they were a child etc);
any suggestion that the subject has lost something (eg, a body part)which, if
it really occurred, could cause considerable distress;
any demonstration in which the subject is suspended between supports (socalled
"catalepsy");
the consumption of any harmful or noxious substance;
any demonstration of the power of hypnosis to block pain (eg, pushing a
needle through the skin);
the performance shall not include giving hypnotherapy or any other form of
treatment;

Completion:

All hypnotised subjects shall remain in the presence of the hypnotist and in
the room where the performance takes place until all hypnotic suggestions
have been removed;
All hypnotic or post-hypnotic suggestions shall be completely removed from
the minds of the subjects and the audience, before the performance ends.
All hypnotised subjects shall have the suggestions removed both individually
and collectively and the hypnotist shall confirm with each of them that they
feel well and relaxed (the restriction on post-hypnotic suggestions does not
prevent the hypnotist telling subjects that they will feel well and relaxed after
the suggestions are removed);
The hypnotist shall remain available for at least 30 minutes after the show to
help deal with any problems which might arise. (Such help might take the
form of reassurance in the event of headaches or giddiness but this
condition does not imply that the hypnotist is an appropriate person to treat
anyone who is otherwise unwell.)

Authorised access:
Where-a constable, or an authorised officer of the licensing authority; or an
authorised officer of the fire authority has reason to believe that a
performance is being, or is about to be, given he may enter the venue with a
view to seeing whether the conditions on which approval for the
performance was granted are being complied with.

With the compliments of
Liquor, Gambling
& Data Protection Unit
Constitutional & Community
Policy Directorate
Home Office
50 Queen Anne's Gate LONDON
SWIH 9AT
Direct Line:
Switchboard:
Fax:
0171-273 3000
0171-273 3205

The Above Was Also Directly Affected By The Subsequent Act Referring To Licensed Premisses.

Licensing Act 2003
2003 CHAPTER 17
Hypnotism Act 1952 (c. 46)
25 The Hypnotism Act 1952 is amended as follows.
26 (1) Section 1 (inclusion in an entertainment licence of conditions in relation to
demonstrations of hypnotism) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (1)—
(a) after “any area” insert “in Scotland”, and
(b) for “places kept or ordinarily used for public dancing, singing, music or other
public entertainment of the like kind” substitute “theatres or other places of public
amusement or public entertainment”.
(3) Omit subsection (2).
27 In section 2 (requirement for authorisation for demonstration of hypnotism)—
(a) in subsection (1), for the words from “in relation” to the end substitute “, unless
—
(a) the controlling authority have authorised that exhibition, demonstration or
performance under this section, or
(b) the place is in Scotland and a licence mentioned in section 1 of this Act is in
force in relation to it.”,
(b) in subsection (1A) for the words from “either at premises” to the end substitute
“at premises in Scotland in respect of which a licence under that Act is in force”,
(c) after subsection (3) insert—
“(3A) A function conferred by this section on a licensing authority is, for the
purposes of section 7 of the Licensing Act 2003 (exercise and delegation by
licensing authority of licensing functions), to be treated as a licensing function
within the meaning of that Act.”, and
(d) for subsection (4) substitute—
“(4) In this section—
• “controlling authority” means—
(a)
in relation to a place in England and Wales, the licensing authority in whose
area the place, or the greater or greatest part of it, is situated, and
(b)
in relation to a place in Scotland, the authority having power to grant
licences of the kind mentioned in section 1 in that area, and
• “licensing authority” has the meaning given by the Licensing Act 2003.”