Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

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

Date:
Monday, 19th March, 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:
Cllr Eileen Johnson, Cllr Paul Kirton and Cllr Miss Tina Large.
Officers:
J Nertney (LD); S Mills (DNS).
In Attendance:
Walter Cook was in attendance and was represented by Mr Ross, Solicitor; Cleveland Police: PC Iceton and Sergeant Daley in attendance and were represented by Mrs Nevison, Solicitor.
Apologies for absence:
None.
Item Description Decision
Public
LSC
43/11
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR
RESOLVED that Councillor Kirton be appointed Chair for this meeting only.
LSC
44/11
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no interests declared.
LSC
45/11
THE GARRICK, 34 YARM LANE, STOCKTON ON TEES - APPLICATION FOR A REVIEW OF A PREMISE LICENCE UNDER THE LICENSING ACT 2003
RESOLVED that:-

1. Remove Walter Cook as the as the Designated Premises Supervisor with immediate effect and that Katy Hutchcraft be appointed as the new Designated Premises Supervisor.

2. Members agreed to reduce the terminal hour for supply of alcohol on a Friday and Saturday to 01:00 hours with an additional 30 minutes as drinking up time. This meant that the premises had a terminal hour for the supply of alcohol till 01:00 seven days per week.

3. No bottles be served to customers. Glass bottles may be stocked in the bar but they must not be served to customers and any drinks in glass bottles must be dispensed into a plastic glass before serving.

4. The premise should use plastic glasses.

5. Drinks should not leave the premises i.e. customers should not be allowed to stand in the street with drinks. If customers wished to smoke outside the premise they were obviously entitled to do so but they should not be allowed to leave with their drinks.

6. On a Friday and Saturday 4 SIA registered doorstaff should be employed at the premise from 20:00 hours until closing.

7. The suspension of the licence would be set aside once Katy Hutchcraft had been appointed as the new Designated Premises Supervisor.
10.00 am - 1.00 pm

Preamble

ItemPreamble
LSC
45/11
The Chair introduced all persons who were present and explained the procedure to be followed during the hearing.

Mr Mills (Licensing Officer) advised Members that an application had been received from Cleveland Police under the provisions of Section 53A of the Licensing Act 2003 for a summary review of the premises licence.

Members were provided with a copy of the following documents:-

* Application for the review of a premises licence under section 53A of the Licensing Act 2003 dated 13 March 2012
* A Certificate under Section 53A(1)(b) of the Licensing Act 2003 signed by Superintendent Best and dated 13 March 2012
* A copy of the Premises Licence
* A copy of the letter from the Licensing Authority confirming suspension of the licence as an interim step dated 15 March 2012
* Representations on behalf of the Premise Licence Holders dated 14 March 2012

Members were invited to view the CCTV footage that had been obtained of the incident of serious disorder. Footage had been taken from cameras inside and outside the premise and also from Council CCTV cameras which showed the incident once it had spilled onto Yarm Lane.

Mr Ross on behalf of the Premise Licence Holder stated that any interim steps taken should be proportionate. There had been no suggestion that weapons such as guns or knives had been used on the premise. The Superintendents certificate stated that after the youths were ejected from the premise there was further disorder. Mr Ross made it clear that the premise licence holder disputed that there was further disorder in the premise and he believed the CCTV footage demonstrated that.

Mr Ross stated that the men who had been acting aggressively in the premises were ejected by the doorstaff who were attacked while undertaking their duties. Injuries were also sustained by patrons of the Garrick who were attacked by the men.

Since the incident on 10 March the premises were open for a number of days before the licence was suspended and there was no suggestion of any retaliatory violence.

Mr Ross detailed the steps that the premise licence holder was proposing to be taken in the interim should the suspension be lifted.
Mr Ross invited the Members to consider the guidance for summary reviews and to act proportionately.

Mrs Nevison on behalf of Cleveland Police stated that PC Iceton had concerns over the role of the door staff and other staff at the premise in relation to their handling of the incident on 10 March.

In the view of the police they believed that the premise should remain suspended pending the outcome of the full review hearing. PC Iceton stated that the Police had received intelligence that the serious disorder may be linked to drugs and they were concerned at the potential for further repercussions.

In considering their decision Members had regard to the written application which had been submitted by Cleveland Police. Members also had regard to guidance issued by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport titled Expedited / Summary Licence Reviews Guidance which was issued in October 2007. Members also heard submissions from the legal representatives for the premise licence holder and Cleveland Police.

Members were satisfied from the information provided by Cleveland Police that there had been serious disorder connected with the premise. Members noted that the incident which had led to the Summary Review application was particularly serious and had occurred at approximately 01.15 a.m. on Saturday 10 March 2012. A fight had occurred within the premises and after the intervention of the door staff had spilled out of the premises onto the public highway. Outside the premises a large number of people continued to fight which involved the use of a weapon(s) and bottles and glasses were also thrown. After viewing the CCTV footage from both inside and outside the premise it was clear that the vast majority of the persons involved in the disorder had been in the premise immediately prior to the disorder. Members of the public involved in the disturbance received a number of injuries which ranged from cuts from glass to a compound fracture of a males leg. One male was arrested at the scene and the Police continued to make enquires following an appeal in the local press which was likely to lead to further arrests.
Members noted that Mr Cook had given interviews in the local press criticising the Police for their response to the incident. Members wished to make it quite clear that they believed the Police were fully justified in responding to the incident and bringing the application for a Summary Review. The correct procedure had been followed and Members had initially considered what interim steps to take, if any. Based on the Polices application Members had decided that it was appropriate for the premises licence to be suspended as an interim step pending the full review hearing. This decision had been based solely on the Polices application. Mr Cook was aggrieved by the suspension of the licence and made a representation to the licensing authority. Members therefore arranged a meeting to hear that representation and both the premise licence holder and the Police were in attendance. The remit of the Committee was to hear the arguments from the premise licence holder and the Police on the interim step, i.e. the suspension of the licence, and decide whether it was necessary to continue with the suspension as an interim step or, alternatively, whether other action should be taken.

Members were in no doubt that this was a very serious incident and was clearly connected with the premise as the fight had occurred within the premise and that members of door staff and patrons of the premise had continued to fight outside. Owing to the large numbers of people involved and the evidence that indicated there were two clear factions involved in the dispute the members continued to be concerned at the risk of further retaliatory violence which could be linked to the premise.

After considering all of the evidence including the submissions from the parties Members were persuaded that conditions could be introduced as interim steps which would address the potential for crime and disorder and public safety. Members agreed to reduce the terminal hour for supply of alcohol on a Friday and Saturday to 01:00 hours with an additional 30 minutes as drinking up time. This meant that the premises had a terminal hour for the supply of alcohol till 01:00 seven days per week.

Members also agreed that no bottles should be served to customers. It was noted that glass bottles may be stocked in the bar but they must not be served to customers and any drinks in glass bottles must be dispensed into a plastic glass before serving. Members also agreed that the premise should use plastic glasses. Both of these measures were deemed necessary as bottles and glasses had been used as weapons in the incident of disorder i.e. one of the doorstaff had a bottle smashed over his head and glasses had also been thrown in the premise and/or street. Members also agreed that drinks should not leave the premises i.e. customers should not be allowed to stand in the street with drinks. If customers wished to smoke outside the premise they were obviously entitled to do so but they should not be allowed to leave with their drinks.

Members also agreed that on a Friday and Saturday 4 SIA registered doorstaff should be employed at the premise from 20:00 hours until closing.

Members gave consideration to whether the DPS should be removed. Members agreed that this would be appropriate and proportionate in these circumstances. Members were of the opinion that the current manager of the premises, namely Katy Hutchcraft, should be appointed as DPS. Both the premises licence holder and the Police indicated that they had no objections to Katy Hutchcraft been appointed as DPS.

The premises licence holder was informed that the Council would hold the full review of the premises licence within 28 days of receipt of the Polices review application.

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