Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Licensing Sub Committee (ceased to operate 10/04/2017) Minutes

Date:
Monday, 23rd January, 2012
Time:
10.00 a.m.
Place:
Council Chamber, Town Hall, High Street, Stockton on Tees, TS18 1AJ
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Councillor Kirton and Councillor Woodhead
Officers:
P. Edwards(DNS) and J. Nertney(LDS)
In Attendance:
Mr Issmat was in attendance (represented by Mr Wilson), Mr Mushtaq Khan Begum and Mrs Fozeia Khan,PC Johnson(Cleveland Police), Person Within The Vicinity of the Premises: Ten representations received. Mr Riches, Mr Ali, Mr Fay, Mr Bell and Mrs Robson were in attendance.
Apologies for absence:
Councillor Mrs Nelson
Item Description Decision
Public
LSC
33/11
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR
RESOLVED that Councillor Kirton be appointed Chair for this meeting only.
LSC
34/11
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 
LSC
35/11
EUROPEAN FOODS, 90 HARTINGTON ROAD - APPLICATION FOR A GRANT OF A PREMISE LICENCE UNDER THE LICENSING ACT 2003

RESOLVED that the application for a premise license for the supply of alcohol for consumption off the premises for the hours requested be granted.
LSC
36/11
RENDE VOUS, 12-14 YARM LANE - APPLICATION FOR A VARIATION OF A PREMISE LICENCE UNDER THE LICENSING ACT 2003
RESOLVED the application for the variation to the premises licence for provision of late night refreshment for the hours requested be refused.

Preamble

ItemPreamble
LSC
34/11
There were no interests declared.
LSC
35/11
The Committee noted the clarification provided by Mr Wilson that the application was for supply of alcohol for consumption off the premises. The objectors who were in attendance confirmed that they were aware the application was for off sales.

The Committee gave consideration to the report, the application and the representation which had been received. The Committee noted that ten representations had been received from persons ‘living within the vicinity of the premises and five of those persons were in attendance at the meeting. A representation had initially been made by Cleveland Police but this had been withdrawn following the agreement of conditions with the applicant.

Mr Wilson on behalf of the applicant stated that this was a small premise measuring approximately 20 feet by 15 feet. Mr Issmat was Kurdish and intended to cater for eastern European customers. Mr Wilson noted that the applicant had agreed conditions with Cleveland Police and their objection had been withdrawn. The objectors were advised of the conditions which had been agreed.

The Committee had regard to the representation received from persons living within the vicinity of the premises. The Committee invited those present who made a representation to outline their objection and concerns over the application.

The persons living within the vicinity of the premise explained that the area was already suffering problems owing to the availability of alcohol. There was currently a lot of anti social behaviour and crime linked to alcohol misuse. There was already premises in the area that supplied alcohol and the area did not need anymore.

The Committee noted that the application before them was for the supply of alcohol for the following hours:-

- Monday to Sunday: from 09:00 to 21:00

The Committee were satisfied that the conditions agreed with Cleveland Police addressed some of the concerns of the objectors as detailed in their representations and oral evidence given to the Committee.

The Committee noted that several of the Objectors had raised the issue that there were sufficient premises in the locality which supplied alcohol. These were not deemed to be relevant considerations for the Committee. The Committee noted that some of the persons who had made a representation were not in attendance at the Committee meeting and further clarification could therefore not be sought as to whether the conditions agreed with Cleveland Police addressed their concerns. Furthermore any existing problems with alcohol or drugs in the area were a separate issue and in the opinion of the Committee were not relevant to the application before them as the Applicant could not be held responsible for any existing concerns that residents had. The Committee noted the conditions which were agreed with Cleveland Police and which would be attached to the licence.

Members of the Committee reminded persons living within the vicinity of the premises that should there be any crime and disorder, noise related nuisance or other relevant issues in the future then these should be raised with either Cleveland Police or the Council's Environmental Health or Licensing Section. The Licensing Act 2003 provided legal routes for persons living within the vicinity of the premise to ask for a review of the premises licence should the premise cause problems linked to the four licensing objectives. Applications for a review would have to be supported by evidence and it was therefore in the best interests of residents to report any matters of concern linked to this premise to the appropriate authorities.
LSC
36/11
The Committee gave consideration to the report, the application and the representations which had been received. A representation had been made by Cleveland Police and the Environmental Health Section.

The application was for the premises to be licensed for the sale of late night refreshment and to extend the terminal hour from 3 a.m. to 4.30 a.m. on a Friday and Saturday evening and till 4.30 a.m. on Bank Holiday Sundays. Mr Khan stated that it was custom and practice for the takeaway shops on Yarm Lane to open till 4.30 a.m. as there was business between 3 a.m. and 4.30 a.m. Mrs Khan stated that the anti social behaviour on Yarm Lane was not the fault of the takeaways but the premises supplying alcohol. The statistical evidence provided by the Police shows only one incident connected with the premise.

Mrs Khan stated that since the premise had been required to close at 3 a.m. then had lost business and there takings were down. Mrs Khan stated that customers now use the takeaway next to G.L.A.M. as that was open till a later hour.

Mrs Khan stated that they note the objection from Environmental Health but they always ensure the front of the premises was swept after closing and they had a bin at the premises.

Mr and Mrs Khan were asked questions by PC Johnson from Cleveland Police. Mrs Khan confirmed that she was aware that the terminal hour for the licence was 3 a.m. but that the premise did open after that hour.

PC Johnson on behalf of Cleveland Police stated that the Police objected to the application in it's entirety. PC Johnson referred to his witness statement and bundle of evidence that had been provided. PC Johnson stated that CCTV footage was available to show Mr Khan's premise opening outside the terminal hour but as Mrs Khan had confirmed that the premise opened and supplied hot food outside of the current licensed terminal hour he did not propose to show the footage to the Committee. PC Johnson stated that other takeaways on Yarm Lane had also recently applied for a similar variation and had been refused by the Committee.

The evidence provided to the Committee showed that the owner of the business had operated the premise outside the permitted hours. This had occurred on many occasions and that he had continued to open outside the licensed terminal hour even after receiving a written warning from the Licensing Section. In the opinion of Cleveland Police this showed the operator of the premise had a complete disregard for the law.

The Police had concerns over the ability of the owner of the premise to fulfill their legal obligations and ensure that the licensing objectives were not undermined. In addition the Police also submitted that the location of this premise was in a recognized hotspot and was fairly unique given the large concentration of takeaway premises. In the opinion of Cleveland Police if the hours for this premise were extended the Licensing objectives would be undermined, would lead to a further drain on Police resources and result in members of the public remaining in the town centre until a later hour with the potential for crime and disorder.

Mr and Mrs Khan were given an opportunity to ask question of PC Johnson.

The Environmental Health Officer had submitted a representation as they had concerns over public nuisance. Mrs Landles stated that they have similar concerns to the Police. There was not an issue with noise from customers in the premises but there was public nuisance when customers leave the premise whether from noise or litter.

The Committee noted that the application before them was to vary the licence for the provision of Late Night Refreshment for the following hours:-

- Friday and Saturday: from 3:00 to 04:30 hours and on bank Holiday Sundays from 03:00 till 04:30 hours

The Committee were satisfied that there were no conditions which could be attached to the licence which would address the evidence given by Cleveland Police. The Committee were satisfied from the Polices evidence that the licensing objectives would be undermined if the application was granted. The statistical evidence showed that this was a hot spot area for crime and disorder and that the peak times were a Friday and Saturday evening. The Committee were satisfied that if the application was granted the licensing objectives would be undermined.

The Committee noted that the applicant had shown either a negligent or wilful disregard for his legal responsibilities in operating the premise. Evidence before the Committee showed that the premise had operated on a number of occasions in breach of the law. From the evidence given by Mr Khan the premises opened in breach of their licence on a weekly basis. The Committee were of the view that the applicant should be able to demonstrate that he can operate the premise legally before they could be satisfied that he would not undermine the licensing objectives.

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction