Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

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

Date:
Tuesday, 3rd February, 2015
Time:
10.00 am
Place:
Council Chamber, Town Hall, High Street, Stockton on Tees, TS18 1AU
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Paul Kirton(Chair), Cllr Bill Woodhead, Cllr Eileen Johnson.
Officers:
S Landles, S Mills(PH), J Nertney(LD)
In Attendance:
Applicant Mr Kevin Blackburn and Miss Lisa Lester(Business Partner of Mr Blackburn), Sergeant Higgins and PC Johnson(Cleveland Police), Mr Webber,(Northern Echo)
Item Description Decision
Public
LSC
50/14
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR
RESOLVED that Councillor Kirton be appointed as Chairman for this meeting only.
LSC
51/14
EVACUATION PROCEDURE
 
LSC
52/14
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 
LSC
53/14
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
RESOLVED that under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Confidential
LSC
54/14
LICENSING ACT 2003
APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF A PREMISE LICENCE
THE ROYAL GEORGE, 116 THORNABY ROAD, THORNABY

  • Report
  • |
    Appendix 1
  • |
    Appendix 2
  • |
    Appendix 3
  • |
    Appendix 4
  • |
    Appendix 5
  • |
    Report
  • |
    Statement
RESOLVED that the Application for Grant of a Premise Licence be refused.
10.00am

Preamble

ItemPreamble
LSC
51/14
The evacuation procedure was noted.
LSC
52/14
There were no declarations of interest.
LSC
54/14
Members were required to determine what action to take in relation to an application for grant of a premise licence under the Licensing Act 2003 to which there had been representations from Responsible Authorities and interested parties.

An application for grant of a premise licence had been received from The Royal George, 116 Thornaby Road, Thornaby.

Representations had been received from Cleveland Police, Environmental Health. The representations related to the prevention of public nuisance and prevention of crime and disorder objectives.

Three representations had been received from interested parties who lived within the vicinity of the premise. The interested parties were not in attendance however the Committee had regard to the written representations that they made in relation to the application.

The Committee gave consideration to the report, the application and the representations which had been received. It was noted that the premise had been previously licensed but that the premises licence had been surrendered on 21 November 2014 while subject to Review proceedings brought by Cleveland Police.

The Applicant Mr Blackburn and his business partner Miss Lester were in attendance at the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation.

The Applicants business partner, Miss Lester drew the Committees attention to a document submitted in support of the applicant headed "Supporting Evidence in Response to Representations Made". Miss Lester addressed the Committee and explained that she did not dispute the previous history of the premises as noted in the evidence submitted by Cleveland Police. Miss Lester also stated that she had many years management experience albeit not in the pub trade and that as Mr Blackburns business partner was committed to making the premise a success if the licence was granted.

Cleveland Police were in attendance at the meeting and were given the opportunity to ask questions of Mr Blackburn and Miss Lester.

Sergeant Higgins explained that the premise had a lengthy history with Cleveland Police and had been subject to review proceedings towards the end of 2014. Sergeant Higgins stated that even though the premise was proposing to wipe the slate clean there were still a number of persons including Mr Blackburn who were previously involved in the premise as employees. PC Johnson stated that given the previous history of the premise and it being a magnet for anti social behaviour and drugs problems any new operator would have to be very experienced in running licensed premises. Unfortunately the Police were strongly of the view that this was not Mr Blackburn. The Police had no faith in Mr Blackburn being able to operate the premise and promote the licensing objectives. Sergeant Higgins noted that although Miss Lester had made a professional presentation of her plans for the premise it was noted that she would rely heavily on Mr Blackburn to manage the premise.

Miss Lester and Mr Blackburn were given an opportunity to ask questions of the representatives of Cleveland Police.

Environmental Health had submitted a representation and following discussion with the applicant, the applicant had agreed to a number of conditions which would be placed on the licence if granted. Mrs Landles from Environmental Health was in attendance to assist with any queries that the parties had.

The Committee were mindful that any evidence to persuade the Committee to refuse or vary the application had to be linked to the licensing objectives. The Committee were mindful that this was a new application and the evidence submitted by the Police in relation to the previous review concerned the previous management of the premise. However it was noted that Mr Blackburn did have some links to the previous management of the premise and there was some evidence to link Mr Blackburn to some of the previous problems which the premise had experienced over the years.

Conditions had been agreed with Environmental Health and these would be attached to the premises licence if granted. Cleveland Police strongly objected to the application made by Mr Blackburn. The Committee shared the concerns expressed by Cleveland Police that Mr Blackburn had little or no understanding or awareness of his obligations in promoting the licensing objectives. Although the Committee were impressed by the presentation given by Miss Lester it was not her application. The application had been made by Mr Blackburn and the Committee were of the view that from the answers given by Mr Blackburn the licensing objectives would be undermined if the license was granted.

After giving consideration to all of the evidence and representations made both in writing and orally the Committee were satisfied that the licensing objectives would be undermined and the application for the premises licence was refused.

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