Home / Comments and Opinions / Can a café owner prohibit someone from being in the establishment and refuse to serve them?

Can a café owner prohibit someone from being in the establishment and refuse to serve them?

Can a hospitality provider prohibit someone from entering their café just like that, for example, because they dislike how the guest is dressed? Yes, they can, because the space in which the café is located is the property of the hospitality provider or is leased by the provider, so if they pay that rent, they can organize their business as they see fit.

However, there are hospitality providers who are not quite sure about this claim, as I see from a discussion that developed on the Facebook page of the Association Voice of Entrepreneurs. What confuses them the most is that a café is a space for public gathering, so they wonder whether they should obtain a ban on entry for a specific person (or persons) from the relevant authorities. Many believe that they do not need any paperwork, but only the will to decide whether to let someone into the establishment. Especially when it comes to guests who create a mess, create a bad atmosphere, argue… Such individuals should simply be asked to leave the establishment, and if they refuse, the police should be called. And that is clear.

But let’s return to those we do not want to admit for some trivial reason. Thus, we can also prohibit their entry into the establishment. I will mention one case that happened in my area, in Bosanska Krajina, which during the last war was the scene of fierce battles between followers of Alija Izetbegović and Fikret Abdić. The war ended, but in Velika Kladuša, which despite military defeat remained a voting stronghold of Abdić’s party, after the war, delegations from the SDA led by President Bakir Izetbegović would come, mostly during election campaigns. About ten years ago, one such delegation, after an election rally, first went to the party premises to chat about various things, and then probably someone from the hosts suggested that they refresh themselves in a nearby café.

Consequences of the Decision

That café was run by an Abdić supporter, so when Izetbegović and his group stepped inside, a waiter (not even the owner) approached them and, in a clear and authoritative voice, resolutely told them that there was no room for them in that establishment, pointing towards the exit. The SDA team turned around and left, some of the local party cadres muttering something, but any discussion was effectively ended by the waiter’s demeanor.

Thus, from this example, we see how sovereign the café owner is on their ‘territory’, as even a high party, and at that time high state delegation had to leave their space simply because the owner did not like them. This happened even in a country where, unfortunately, the rule of law stands on shaky ground.

Of course, the question is what consequences the café owner may face. For example, if the owner does not want to admit members of a certain family into their establishment for some trivial reason (they cheer for a club that is a rival to their club), then this is not just a matter of morality, but also a potential boycott by fans of the opposing club, as well as those who consider it unfair. The business suffers in that case.

Ownership is Sacred

But if some guest(s) constantly create disturbances, no one will blame them. I know of such an example, again from my area. There was a guy, with whom I generally have a correct relationship, although my team and I always avoid him, who was for a time in the ‘disfavor’ of local café owners. The reason is that at one point in his life he provoked fights, once even while sitting in our company. The waiters immediately threw him out, and as he could not calm down during that period of his ‘stormy’ life (because supposedly everyone provokes him), he became a very undesirable guest in many establishments. In the last few years, he has not caused incidents, freely visiting establishments, but I am not quite sure how happy the owners are to see him. That is why my team avoids him.

In any case, private ownership is sacred, even if the owner is not fair to a potential guest, i.e., if they prohibit entry without any reason. However, such cases are indeed rare, and there is almost always a justified reason for such a radical decision by the hospitality provider.

POST SCRIPTUM

Anyone who serves alcoholic beverages to an intoxicated person or a minor under the age of 16 will be punished for the offense with a fine ranging from 200 to a thousand euros. This is stated in Article 19 of the Law on Offenses Against Public Order and Peace. Some participants in the aforementioned discussion on the Facebook page of the Association Voice of Entrepreneurs also warn about this from their personal experience. Therefore, in such situations, even if there is a dilemma about whether to prohibit a guest’s entry, the café owner can say that they acted preventively to maintain public order and peace. By the way, pay attention to the word ‘gives’. Thus, the law does not state ‘who sells’, but ‘who gives’, so even those of you who want to treat an intoxicated person should look around to see if some diligent inspector is watching you.