Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report on an application for a new premises licence for Singh Brothers EM Ltd 258-260 Victoria Road East, LE5 0LF.

Report attached. A copy of the associated documentation is attached for Members only. Further copies area available on the Council’s website at www.cabinet.leicester.gov.uk or by telephoning Democratic Support on (0116) 4546354.

(Ward aggected: Troon)

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report on an application for the review of an existing premises licence, for Singh Brothers EM Ltd., 258 – 260 Victoria Road East, Leicester, LE5 0LF

The Premises Licence Holder (PLH) / Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) Mr Baljinder Singh was present, accompanied by his agent Mr Anil Bhavsar, Licensing Agent. Councillor Cank was present as an objector accompanied by a local resident. Also present was the Licensing Team Manager (Policy and Applications) and the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee.

The Licensing Team Manager (Policy and Applications) presented the report and outlined details of the application. It was noted a petition was received on 1^st November 2021 from local residents and shop owners. The representation related to the licensing objectives of the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and public safety.

The Sub-Committee Members noted a representation had been received on 2^nd November 2021 from Councillor Cank. The representation was made on the grounds of the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and public safety. Councillor Cank expressed her opposition to a licence being granted advising that there were already two premises in the small parade of shops selling alcohol. She added that an application was made for the same premises just over 12 months ago which was strongly opposed by in excess of 300 residents in the immediate area.

Members were informed a further representation was received on 10^th November 2021 from residents living around Brackley Close Post Office. The representation related to the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and public safety. The residents strongly opposed the application as there were already a few premises selling alcohol in the area, and given that there were already significant problems with street drinking and anti-social behaviour, residents believed another off licence would only escalate what was already a growing problem.

Councillor Cank addressed the Sub-Committee as an objector and on behalf of the local residents who signed the petition, and answered questions from the Members, the Applicant, and his licensing agent. Councillor Cank expressed concern that another off licence would further add to litter, noise, and antisocial behaviour in the area. Councillor Cank provided new evidence at the hearing, and it was agreed by all present that  it could be circulated and used in the hearing.

Mr Singh and his licensing agent were given the opportunity to put forward their case and address the concerns raised by the objector and answer questions from Members and officers.

All parties were then given the opportunity to sum up their positions and make any final comments.

The Sub-Committee received legal advice from the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee in the presence of all those present.

In reaching their decision, Members felt they should deliberate in private on the basis that this was in the public interest, and as such outweighed the public interest of their deliberation taking place with the parties represented present.

The Chair announced that the decision and reasons made during private deliberation would be publicly announced in writing within five working days. The Chair informed the meeting the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee would be called back to give advice on the wording of the decision.

The Chair then asked all but Members of the Sub-Committee and Democratic Support Officers to leave the meeting. The Sub-Committee then deliberated in private to consider their decision.

The Sub-Committee recalled the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee to give advice on the wording of the decision.

RESOLVED:

That the application for a new premises licence at Singh Brothers EM Ltd, 258-260 Victoria Road East, LE5 0LF be REFUSED.

Members of the Sub-Committee had been asked to determine an application made under the Licensing Act 2003, for a new premises licence.

In reaching their decision the Sub-Committee Members carefully considered the Committee report presented by the Licensing Team Manager (Policy and Applications), all representations and the legal advice provided.

The Sub-Committee had considered carefully the representations made by the Applicant and those made and received in writing from local residents and businesses, and a local Ward Councillor.

The Sub-Committee Members considered the licensing objectives to be of paramount concern and had considered the application on its own merits and in accordance with the licensing authority’s Statement of Licensing Policy, the Regulator’s Code and the Statutory Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Members had not taken anything presented to them at face value and confirmed they had scrutinised the information put before them by all parties.

The Sub-Committee had considered each of the decisions available to them.   As a result of what they had heard, Members were satisfied that that it was appropriate and proportionate considering the licensing objectives to REJECT THE APPLICATION.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Members accepted the evidence presented to them by the objectors to the Hearing that there was a problem relating to public nuisance in the area, namely litter, and were of the opinion that granting the licence would add to the existing problems.

Members did not believe that any conditions which could be added to the licence that were justifiable and appropriate or were within the control of the licence holder, would alleviate all the concerns they had.

The Sub-Committee’s decision was made in the interests of promoting the licensing objectives.

The application would be advised that they had a right to appeal the decision  within 21 days to the Magistrates Court.