Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report.  They advised that the applicant was not in attendance despite having been sent invites for the meeting.  The licensing officer advised that they had not received any communication from the applicant.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

The licensing officer representing the council as a responsible authority addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

The Metropolitan Police Service representative addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the police representative.

The local resident objecting to the application addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the local resident.

All parties were given five minutes for summing up.

The meeting adjourned at 11.57am for the members to consider their decision.

The meeting resumed at 1.26pm The chair did not read out the decision as none of the parties were present.

RESOLVED:

That the application made by ESCI Limited to vary a premises licence to be granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as The Round, Strakers Road, London SE15 3UA be refused except in so far as:

Plan number : CPR-MS-PR-AL-470 dated 18.12.17 shall to replace plans PRP.L.01, PRP.L.02 and PRP.L.03, dated March 2006

Reasons

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

The licensing sub-committee heard from the licensing officer who advised that the applicant was not in attendance and no communication had been received despite attempts to make contact.

The licensing sub-committee did not hear from the applicant.

The licensing sub-committee heard from the representative for licensing as a responsible authority who advised their representation sought information from the applicant as the proposed operating schedule gave limited information. While the overall reduction in opening hours was welcomed the applicant was seeking to extend the premises licence hours for the sale of alcohol and the introduction of off-sales and had failed to suggest any additional measures that could be put in place to prevent a negative impact on the licensing objectives. It was therefore difficult to make any positive recommendation to the sub-committee.

The representative for the Metropolitan Police Service echoed the sentiments of the representative for licensing as a responsible authority and advised the proposed control measures set out in the operating schedule were not precise enough to be clear and enforceable (s.182 Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (April 2018), paragraph 1.16). The applicant’s failure to respond meant the officer was also unable to make any recommendation to the sub-committee.

The licensing sub-committee heard the representations from Party 1, of the Friends of Peckham Park who objected to the application and informed the sub-committee that in 2009 the limited the hours for the sale of alcohol was imposed to prevent crime and disorder and nuisance. Party 1 also pointed out that the park was only open until 21:00 hours between May to July and closed earlier the rest of the year. There were real concerns about off-sales and individuals being intoxicated around the park and creating excessive litter with bottles/cans particularly near the children’s playground.

The licensing sub-committee noted representations from two other persons also objecting to the application.

The licensing sub-committee were concerned about the applicant’s failure to attend the meeting and lack of contact with responsible authorities meant that the applicant had not sufficiently addressed the four licensing objectives.

In the absence of any response or attendance by the applicant the licensing sub-committee considered that they did not have sufficient information available to them to make an informed decision to enable them to grant the variation with the exception of the change of plans which was duly accepted.

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 to modify the conditions of the licence; and

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

a)  That variation ought not to have been made; or

b)  That, when varying the licence, the licensing authority ought not to have modified the conditions of 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.