BREWERY giant Bass has won a stay of execution after a Bolton landlord was awarded an astonishing £215,000 in a county court ruling - for refusing to buy the firm's beer. Colin Joynson, 53, licensee of the New Inn, Halliwell Road, for 16 years won the cash in a Manchester County Court hearing to compensate him for lost trade and "overpayments" for beer.

Colin - who runs the popular local with his wife Helen - is forced to buy beer from Bass because he is on a tied lease to the brewery. But he claims that he can get the same beer from a wholesaler at a massive discount of £52 per barrel.

Since the judgment the ex-professional wrestler has been able to go elsewhere for his beer. Colin, who is wheelchair-bound after an operation on his foot, explained: "When we signed the lease in 1992 we were obliged to buy beer from Bass.

"If we had carried on buying beer from them we would have gone out of business and now buy cheaper from a wholesaler.

"Other pubs not tied to a brewery were taking our customers because they were buying from a wholesaler and passing the savings on to drinkers.

"It was getting to the stage where we were struggling to pay the bills and only selling half as much beer as we used to.

"There are many landlords in a similar position. If the ruling is upheld more pubs may be able to sell cheaper beer." When Bass did not respond to his court action, Colin was awarded £215,504 plus £80 costs.

But the brewery is now preparing to go back to court to have the judgement overturned. Bass claims that the court summons was sent to the wrong address after the firm moved its registered office from Burton Upon Trent to London in June last year.

Bass representatives, therefore, were not at the county court to defend the action when the ruling was made.

Colin has spent about £60,000 of his own money on the pub in the last four years. A spokesman for Bass told the BEN: "A stay of execution has been confirmed at Manchester District Registry on August 1 and an application is being made to the County Court in Manchester to have the judgement set aside.

"It was not possible to defend the claim due to the summons not being received by the Company."

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.