Agenda item

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

 

The environmental protection team officer, the applicant for the review addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the environmental protection officer.

 

The licensing officer as a responsible authority, supporting the review, addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

 

The representatives from the premises addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the representatives from the premises.

 

All parties were given five minutes for summing up.

 

The meeting adjourned at 1.27pm for the sub-committee to consider its decision.

 

The meeting reconvened at 2.50pm and the chair advised all parties of the decision.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That following an application by the environmental protection team for a review of the premises licence in respect of The Brunel, 47 Swan Road, London SE16 4JN, the conditions of the licence shall be modified pursuant to section 52(4)(a) of the Licensing Act 2003 as follows:

 

Conditions

 

Condition 309 shall be removed from the premises licence.

 

Condition 841 shall be amended as follows: “The beer garden must not be used on any day after 23:00, save for persons temporarily leaving the premises to smoke. No drinks shall be allowed outside of the premises after 23.00”.

 

The following conditions shall be added to the premises licence:

 

1)  That there shall be at least one SIA approved door supervisor employed at the premises between 21.00 hours and closing time on Fridays and Saturdays, and on any other days that the premises are open beyond 01.00.

 

2)  That the door supervisor shall sign an attendance log declaring an understanding of the licence conditions. This log shall be retained for inspection by a police officer or an authorised officer of the council for a period of 6 months.

 

3)  That the door supervisor shall ensure that the doors to the street shall remain closed whilst on duty save for immediate access or egress.

 

4)  That a sound limiting device shall be installed, set and maintained, to control maximum levels of amplified sound inside the premises so as to ensure entertainment noise from the premises does not cause a public nuisance in the vicinity of the premises.

 

5)  That all audio and musical equipment used in the premises, permitted under the Licensing Act 2003 or the Live Music Act 2012, shall be played through the installed sound limiting device at all times.

 

6)  That any additional amplification equipment imported on to the premises by third parties, permitted under the Licensing Act 2003 or the Live Music Act 2012, shall be connected to and use the installed sound limited device/circuit at all times.

 

Reasons

 

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

 

This was an application pursuant to section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003 made by the Environmental Protection Team as a responsible authority for a review of the premises licence in respect of the premises known as The Brunel, 47 Swan Road, London SE16 4JN.

 

The licensing sub-committee heard from the applicant for the review. He referred to the documented series of complaints of noise from the premises, including a statutory noise nuisance witnessed on 14 July 2019 which resulted in an abatement notice that is under appeal in separate proceedings. Despite positive engagement on the part of the licence holders, there had been further complaints in recent days, though these fell short of statutory nuisance. The complaints essentially related to loud music, often in conjunction with doors to the premises being left open and permitting noise to escape.

 

A number of the complaints related to noise occurring before 23.00. The problem was that, as a result of section 177A(2) of the Licensing Act 2003, the conditions on the licence relating to the playing of music, karaoke and such like are no longer enforceable before 23.00. In order to solve the problem of noise before that time, it would be necessary to alter the relevant conditions so as to include a statement that section 177A does not apply to them, by virtue of section 177A(3). Further, a number of additional conditions relating to sound equipment should be added to the licence and one unworkable condition removed. In essence, what the applicant was asking for was a reasonable set of enforcement tools to deal with the noise problem. The licence holder’s proposal of door supervision was a good additional control, but not sufficient in itself.

 

The licensing sub-committee also heard from the representative of the licensing authority, who fully supported the application. Although not every complaint amounted to a statutory nuisance, there was a problem of noise escaping from the premises and the disapplication of section 177A of the Act would assist. A condition relating to door supervisors was a good one, but the licensing team supported the other amendments to the licence sought by the applicant.

 

The licensing sub-committee also took account of written representations from two other persons who did not attend the hearing.

 

The licensing sub-committee heard from the representative of the licence holder. He pointed out that his client had only taken over the premises in March 2018 and that the vast majority of complaints predated their involvement. The licence holder was not complacent about the situation and was taking action. A meeting in August with responsible authorities had resulted in an action plan. Since then, there had been no further complaints until early October. The recent complaint about karaoke could not be right as there had been no karaoke at the premises that evening and, had there been, it would not have gone on for only 45 minutes.

 

He stressed that any action taken by the licensing authority as a result of the review must be evidence-based and proportionate. Further, the best practicable means should be adopted to solve any problem. What the applicant was seeking went beyond what was necessary to address the issues. By issuing the abatement notice and seeking a review, the environmental protection team were taking a step too far and attempting ‘double enforcement’. In his submission, the best and most effective solution to the problem would be to add a condition to the premises licence relating to door supervision. This would best ensure that doors were kept closed and the behaviour of customers was monitored.

 

The licensing sub-committee found that the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance was engaged as a result of noise emanating from the premises at times prior to 23.00.

 

The licensing sub-committee did not however consider it necessary in this case to disapply section 177A of the Licensing Act 2003 to any of the conditions on the licence.

 

Instead, the sub-committee decided that it would be sufficient to promote the licensing objectives in this case to modify the conditions of the premises licence pursuant to section 52(4)(a) of the Licensing Act 2003 as set out above.

 

The licensing sub-committee noted that the licence holder undertook to minimise the use of single-use plastics in its operation, for example by the use of paper straws and reusable plastic glasses.

 

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

 

This decision is open to appeal by either:

 

a)  The applicant for the review

b)  The premises licence holder

c)  Any other person who made relevant representations in relation to the application 

 

Such appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the justices chief executive for the magistrates court for the area within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by this licensing authority of the decision.

 

This decision does not have effect until either:

 

a)  The end of the period for appealing against this decision

b)  In the event of any notice of appeal being given, until the appeal is disposed of.