Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report.  Members had no questions for the licensing officer.

The applicant was unable to attend the hearing but they appointed a representative to speak on their behalf. The applicant’s representative addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the applicant’s representative.

The applicant was given five minutes for summing up.

The meeting went into closed session at 5.01pm.

The meeting resumed at 5.15pm and the chair read out the decision of the sub-committee.

RESOLVED:

That the application made by Mr Tobi Raphael to vary the premises licence granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as Mama Leah’s 660 Old Kent Road London SE15 1JF is granted as follows:

Conditions

The operation of the premises under the licence shall be subject to relevant mandatory conditions, conditions derived from the operation schedule highlighted in Section M of the application form and conditions agreed by the applicant with the responsible authorities during the conciliation process.

Reasons

This was an application made by Mr Tobi Raphael to vary the premises licence granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as Mama Leah’s 660 Old Kent Road London SE15 1JF.

The licensing sub-committee heard evidence from the applicant’s representative (business partner) who informed the sub-committee that the premises wanted to extend their opening hours and business, at the request of their patrons.  The premises frequently have bookings for birthdays, christenings and such like.  Patrons have said that they would like to stay a bit later and that the variation would strengthen the business.  He confirmed that they had conciliated with the responsible authorities and that were happy to implement the conciliated conditions

The licensing sub-committee noted that the applicant had conciliated with the Metropolitan Police Service, the environmental protection team and licensing as a responsible authority.

The licensing sub-committee noted the written representations from three local residents objecting to the application, one of whom had contacted the licensing officer complaining of noise nuisance on the night of 26 September 2015 at 01.15.  In response to this the applicant advised that the premises had been closed at the time of the alleged incident and that a neighbouring licensed premises was known to play loud music.  As the local resident had not contacted the noise team, this allegation could not be confirmed or denied.

In reaching this decision the sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations and the four licensing objectives and considered that this decision was appropriate and proportionate in order to address the licensing objectives.

Appeal rights

The applicant may appeal against any decision:

a)  To impose conditions on the licence

b)  To exclude a licensable activity or refuse to specify a person as premises supervisor.

Any person who made relevant representations in relation to the application who desire to contend that:

a)  That the  licence ought not to be been granted or

b)  That on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought  to have imposed different or additional conditions on the licence, or ought to have modified them in a different way

may appeal against the decision.

Any appeal must be made to the Magistrates’ Court for the area in which the premises are situated.  Any appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the Justices’ Clerk for the Magistrates’ Court within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by the licensing authority of the decision appealed against.