Agenda and minutes
Wednesday, 15th December, 2010 10.00 am
Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XA. View directions
Contact: Jane Creer 020 8379 4093 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
The Chairman welcomed everyone attending the meeting, introduced the sub-committee members, and set out the meeting procedures.
NOTED that the reports listed on the agenda had not been circulated in accordance with the requirements of the Council’s Constitution and the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (England) Amendment Regulations 2002. These requirements state that agendas and reports should be circulated at least 5 clear days in advance of meetings.
Members of the Sub-Committee are invited to identify any personal or prejudicial interests relevant to items on the agenda. Please refer to the guidance note attached to the agenda.
NOTED that there were no declarations of interest in respect of any items on the agenda.
FAVORITE CHICKEN & RIBS, 120, LANCASTER ROAD, ENFIELD, EN2 0JW
Premises Licence application.
NOTED that consideration of this application had been adjourned to a future meeting.
Premises Licence application.
REPORT SENT TO FOLLOW – ATTACHED
Report No. 152
RECEIVED an application made by Mr Mohammad Waseem Khan for the premises known as and situated at S T Food & Wine, 1-2 Colman Parade, Enfield, EN1 for variation of the Premises Licence.
1. Initial clarification of points by the Council’s legal representative, including the following points:
a. A licence had been granted in error in September 2010.
b. The details of the administrative error were set out in Annex 06 of the report.
c. The premises had traded in accordance with that licence from the time it was issued until the end of November. During that period the licence holder had not acted improperly and had not been aware of the error. The applicant had acted in good faith on the basis of the licence which had been granted.
d. The Council had recognised the mistake that the licence had not been properly issued and advised the licence holder accordingly on 23 November.
e. The mistake had therefore been rectified and the application must be determined by the Licensing Sub-Committee and hence was being considered at today’s hearing.
2. The opening statement of Mark Galvayne, Principal Licensing Officer, including the following points:
a. The application was to vary the existing premises licence.
b. The application sought a change in hours the premises were open to the public on Friday and Saturday from 07:00 to 03:00 the following day and supply of alcohol (off supplies) on Sunday to Thursday from 07:00 to 02:00 the following day and on Friday and Saturday from 07:00 to 03:00 the following day.
c. The application was subject to one representation, from Trading Standards.
d. The representation was set out in Annex 04 of the report and a colour copy of page 28 had also been circulated to all parties.
e. All the licensing conditions were set out on pages 32 – 34 and all had been agreed by the applicant and no additional conditions were sought today.
3. The opening statement of Ellie Green, Principal Trading Standards Officer, including the following points:
a. Trading Standards having considered the application, believed it was necessary to object to any extension of hours and made representation regarding the licensing objectives of prevention of public nuisance, protection of children from harm, prevention of crime and disorder, and public safety.
b. She highlighted the most significant issues, advising that the area had been a hot spot for crime over the last year, which raised serious concerns within the Council. Page 28 showed an extract from a community safety report which recorded that 40% of crime occurred between 21:00 and 03:00 with the greater number of offences between 00:00 and 02:00. 44% of the offences recorded were for violence and most occurred between the train station and S T Food & Wine.
c. She also highlighted the disclaimer that many assaults taking place between 00:00 and 03:00 were unlikely to be recorded because of a limited police presence and therefore the data only provided a snapshot.
d. The area ... view the full minutes text for item 582.
Personal Licence application.
REPORT SENT TO FOLLOW - ATTACHED
Report No. 153
RECEIVED an application made by Mr SametKar for a Personal Licence.
1. The opening statement of Mark Galvayne, Principal Licensing Officer, including the following points:
a. An application had been made by Mr Kar for a personal licence.
b. Mr Kar had been advised on 23/11/10 that the Licensing Sub-Committee would consider his application at today’s meeting.
c. On 03/12/10 Mr Kar had acknowledged receipt of that notification and sent the response to the objection as set out in para 3.1 of the report.
d. A copy of the agenda for this meeting was emailed to Mr Kar on 09/12/10. Subsequent to that Mr Kar had not communicated further with the Council.
e. Immediately prior to this hearing officers confirmed that Mr Kar had not contacted the Council this morning.
f. The application was subject to an objection from the Police who considered that granting the licence would undermine the crime prevention objective.
g. It was for Members to consider the application and make the decision today. This could be done without the applicant being present.
2. The opening statement of PC Steve Hodgson, on behalf of PC Martyn Fisher, Enfield Borough Police Licensing Officer, including the following points:
a. The Police as responsible authority had been made aware that Mr Kar had made an application for a personal licence and had carried out the usual checks to assess his suitability.
b. Mr Kar had been convicted for the offence of assault in 2008, which was a domestic incident involving his wife. He was sentenced to four months for battery and nine months for having an article with a blade in a public place.
c. The offence was still relevant under The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
d. The Police did not think that Mr Kar was a suitable person to hold a personal licence and therefore objected to granting this application.
3. In response to queries from Councillor Cicek about Mr Kar’s other convictions in 2005, PC Hodgson advised they were not included in his representation as they did not come under rehabilitation records and Mr Kar was not given a prison sentence. They were not relevant to this hearing.
4. The closing statement of Mark Galvayne, drawing Members’ attention to paragraph 4.5 on page 36 of the report that the Secretary of State recommends that, where the Police have issued an Objection Notice, the Licensing Sub-Committee should normally refuse the application unless there are exceptional and compelling circumstances which justify granting it. The exceptional and compelling circumstances put forward by Mr Kar were set out on page 35 in his response to the objection.
5. Confirmation by PC Hodgson that in the last five years, the only other applications for a personal licence by a person with convictions which had been subject to objections from the Police had been withdrawn before a hearing had taken place, with the exception of one. In that case the licence had been granted, but the Police had appealed ... view the full minutes text for item 583.