Agenda item

Licensing Act 2003: Latin House, 4 Coldharbour Lane, London SE5 9PR

Minutes:

The licensing officer presented their report.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

 

The applicant and their legal representative addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the applicant and their legal representative.

 

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

 

Both parties were given five minutes for summing up.

 

The meeting adjourned at 11.20am for the sub-committee to consider its decision.

 

The meeting reconvened at 11.28am and the chair advised all parties of the decision.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application made by Latin House Limited Ltd for a variation of the premises in respect of the premises known Latin House, 4 Coldharbour Lane, London SE5 9PR be granted under Section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

 

Conditions

 

The operation of the premises under the licence shall be subject to relevant mandatory conditions, any conditions derived from the operating schedule in Section M of the application form and conditions conciliated with environmental protection team, licensing as a responsible authority and planning authority during conciliation.

 

Reasons

 

The licensing sub-committee heard from the representative for the applicant who advised that the purpose of the application was to removed embedded conditions and add more robust conditions as set out within the operating schedule of the application. There would be slight change to the operating hours, but these were consistent with Southwark’s statement of licensing policy; there would be no change to the business model and that the premises would remain as a restaurant.

 

The licensing sub-committee heard from a local resident, who informed the sub-committee that they strongly objected to the amendment of the licencing hours for the premises. The business had been a continuous nuisance, due to the business’ extractors prevented local residents from sleeping.  Extending the operating hours would materially change the nature of the premises clientele from a restaurant to a bar, which had already begun with karaoke nights and the premises offering free beer. In turn, local residents would endure more public nuisance of patrons smoking outside and parking difficulties until 01:00 in a quiet residential road

 

The licensing sub-committee noted that all of the representations from responsible authorities had conciliated.

 

The local resident indicated that a number of other local residents had experienced noise nuisance from the premises, but the evidence heard by the sub-committee suggested that there were no other objectors.  The sub-committee were informed that there had been one complaint, but it was unclear whether the objector to this application was the complainant. The applicant had been granted three temporary event notices (TENs) during the course of 2019, no objection notices had been submitted in respect of any of the TENs. The local resident spoke of extreme noise nuisance from the premises extractors, but the sub-committee were informed that the extractor was the same that the previous premises had. Officers from the environmental protection team had also inspected the extractor, but found that it was not a noise nuisance. Ultimately, the installation of the extractor was a planning matter and any further problems that the local resident may have, should be report to them.

 

The Section 182 Guidance confirms that it is the licensing authority that is best placed to determine what actions are appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives in its area. All applications should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Paragraph 9.43 provides that the determination must be evidence-based, justified as being appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives and proportionate to what it is intended to achieve.

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: