Agenda item

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

The applicant addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the applicant.

The licensing sub-committee noted the written representations from the two local residents objecting to the application.

The applicant was given five minutes for summing up.

The meeting went into closed session at 11.03am.

The meeting resumed at 11.59am.  The chair did not read out the decision of the sub-committee as there was nobody present.

RESOLVED:

That the application made by Julia Rose-Weir, for a variation of a premises licence, granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as Darwin Court Café, 1 Crail Row, London SE17 1AD 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 the following additional conditions agreed by the sub-committee:

1.  That a Challenge 25 policy (requiring all those believed to be under the age of 25 to provide identification) will be adopted and a poster on the premises will be displayed to this effect.

Reasons

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

The applicant addressed the sub-committee and emphasised that the extended opening hours would not be for public events, but for private functions held by local residents, or local groups that the Peabody Trust already worked with, for example to host staff parties, or quiz nights. The applicant stated that they had been operating on their current licence for a period of five years, and that no complaints had been made to the council during that time.

The applicant stated that they have a small alcohol selection available, covering wine, and beer and that currently alcohol sales made up a small percentage of their overall turnover. The applicant explained some of the measures they put in place to ensure safety, such as having events staffed by their own staff, no alcohol being allowed outside, including in the garden area, and procedures for handling anti-social behaviour, which were already in place.

The licensing sub-committee noted the written representations from the two local residents objecting to the application.

The licensing sub-committee considered all of the oral and written representations before it and were of the opinion that the conditions on the existing license, and the procedures the applicant already had in place satisfied the licensing objectives.

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.

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)  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 to 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.