Agenda item

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities for a new premises licence within the Seven Dials Cumulative Impact Policy Area. The application was summarised by the Licensing Officer.

The agent Bobby Nakum representing the applicant, confirmed that the hours applied for in the application had been amended to the following:

Supply of Alcohol (For consumption off the premises)

Monday to Saturday 08:00 until 23:00   

Sunday 10:00 to 22:30

Opening Hours

Monday to Saturday 08:00 until 23:00     

Sunday 10:00 to 22:30 

The applicant had also agreed to the conditions proposed by the Police Responsible Authority.  

Julia Peterson on behalf of the Licensing Responsible Authority summarised their written representation. The premises was within the Seven Dials Cumulative Impact Policy Area where there was a presumption to refuse all new applications and this application should be refused in its entirety.   

PC Christopher Malone, Metropolitan Police, Police Responsible Authority

summarised his written representation that included concerns that a small shop, with late opening hours would encourage more people to remain in the area and would make more alcohol available. This would add to the consumption of alcohol in the area, and the serious problems associated with alcohol and intoxication.  

In response to questions:

·       PC Malone confirmed that the times stated in his written representations on Friday , Saturday and Bank Holidays and Sundays of 10:00 to 18:00 were because of the problems and anti-social behaviour on the streets in the area

·       Bobby Nakum confirmed that the plan on page 74 of the agenda should not have been included in the application  

Interested parties

·       There were no Interested Parties present at the meeting, but their written representations had been included in the report and given due consideration by the Panel.  

Bobby Nakum representing the applicant provided an outline of the application that included:

·       This was a small premises in a Cumulative Impact Policy Area and that it would not impact on the area

·       76% of businesses near the premises that had been granted licences were white owned in comparison to those owned by other ethnicities. It was his view that this was a breach of the equalities act where minorities were treated less favourably

·       The owner of the premises would not serve alcohol to anyone who was intoxicated or to drug dealers

·       The applicant was happy to accept the Police Responsible Authority conditions and had agreed to amend the application

·       There would be no large deliveries of alcohol, this was a small premises and the sale of alcohol was ancillary to the sale of other goods but would help with the viability of the business. Alcohol would be approximately 20% of sales

·       The applicant would accept shelves with shutters to store the alcohol   

·       11pm was within the framework hours

 Asked by the Panel about an accurate layout of the premises, no clarification could be provided. Mr Nakum said that the plan shown on page 74 of the agenda was incorrect and did not form part of the application. The correct plan of the premises was on page 75. 

The parties summed up their representations as follows:

·       The Licensing Responsible Authority requested that the application be refused in its entirety because it was situated in a cumulative impact policy area

·       The Police Responsible Authority asked for the application to be refused because of concerns about the sale of alcohol for preloading before attending other premises in the locality and that alcohol would be the main product sold at the premises

·       Nothing further was added by Mr Nakum on behalf of the applicant       

Decision and Reasons 

In deliberation, the Panel discussed that the premises was in a Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) area, and whether it had been demonstrated that the application was an exception to the presumption to refuse applications in the CIP area. The Panel considered the representations from the Responsible Licensing Authority, the Police Responsible Authority, the Interested Parties and what they had heard about the application. The Panel was of the view that the reasons given for the viability of a business was not a justifiable exception to the CIP.  

With regard to equalities issues about  only white businesses being granted licences in the CIP area that had been raised by the applicant, this was the first time that this had been mentioned in licensing applications.  The Chair noted  that the consideration of  licensing  applications was carried out by Panel members having due regard to the requirements set out under the legislation and the Council’s statement of licensing policy. Furthermore each application was considered on its merits and the ethnicity of applicants was not a consideration.

The Panel agreed that the application should be refused in its entirety because the premises was located within the Seven Dials Cumulative Impact Policy Area, where there was a presumption to refuse applications unless it could be demonstrated that the application was an exception to the policy and would not add to cumulative impact in the area. The Panel was of the view that an exception had not been demonstrated and that it had not been shown how the application would not add to cumulative impact to the area.  For these reasons  it was agreed that the application would be refused because to grant it would not uphold the prevention of crime and disorder or the prevention of public nuisance licensing objectives and was likely to add to cumulative impact.

RESOLVED

THAT the application be refused in its entirety

To Note: All