Agenda and minutes

To note the guidance on remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance on remote meetings be agreed.

Apologies were received from Councillor Jenny Headlam-Wells. It was noted that the meeting was quorate with two Members present.

There were no declarations of interest.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair announced: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.’

There were no notifications of urgent business.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3^rd February and 10^th March 2022.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meetings held on 3^rd February and 10^th March 2022.

Councillor Gardiner said that he had given apologies to the 10^th March meeting but they had not been recorded.

RESOLVED –

(i)            THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 3^rd February 2022 be approved;

(ii)          THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 10^th March 2022 be approved, subject to the amendment above.

Report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities.

This is an application to review a premises licence under section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report and explained that the Metropolitan Police Responsible Authority had submitted an application to review the premises licence. The Police had submitted the application as they were of the view that the premises had not been upholding the licensing objective of the prevention of crime and disorder.

PC Dominic Hallam presented the Police case. He outlined details of incidents that had taken place, and showed footage of an assault on a member of bar staff which took place on 1^st April.

PC Hallam said that the Police had met with staff from the premises on 6^th September to outline their concerns. They had proposed that there be ID scans on entry to the premises, but the management had said that it was unaffordable.

Subsequent to that meeting with management, there had been the incident of the assault on a member of staff which was depicted in the CCTV footage and an incident where there had been a serious sexual assault on a customer.

The Police had not been called in relation to the sexual assault, which was a contravention of the licence conditions. Additionally, the CCTV footage was poor quality, and did not enable identification of the alleged perpetrator. 

PC Hallam stated that most reported crimes in the premises occurred at late hours, and so the Police were proposing that the hours be reduced to framework hours.

With regard to the footage of incident where the barman was assaulted, the Police were asked when this took place. PC Hallam said it took place at 22.17. It was noted that a SIA registered door supervisor ought to have been present from 22.15 onwards as per the conditions of the licence, but no door supervisor was present. The Licence Holder’s Representative said that the door supervisor who had been scheduled to attend that evening had been running late.

The Licensing Authority Responsible Authority had made a representation in support of the Police application. Afshar Ahmad spoke to the representation and said that the Authority had concerns about poor management in the premises and insufficient control being exercised over its operation.

The Panel heard from Interested Parties who were supportive and who were against the Police’s review application.

Dr Arran Schlosberg spoke in support of the review and explained his concerns about public nuisance emanating from the premises. He was of the view that a 3am closing time was too late for a premises in a residential area.

Bioux Lee Haynes spoke against the review. He said he had worked as a freelance DJ at Joe’s Bar and had formerly lived near the premises. He did not feel that the premises had generated noise nuisance; and he said he had confidence in the new security manager at the premises to deal with crime and disorder. He said that late opening hours were necessary in order for the premises to attract customers who were coming  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

There was no other business.

Should the Panel wish to go into closed session, it will take the following resolution:

THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of the Licensing Panel on 19^th April 2022 during consideration of the respective item on the agenda on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that were members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Specifically -

Publicity in respect of item x would be likely to lead to the disclosure of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings by virtue of Category 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).