Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There was no urgent business.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

There was no declarations of interest.

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting and declared that the Sub-Committee was sitting to consider an application for a premises licence in respect of King’s Lynn Express, 103b High Street, King’s Lynn.  He introduced the Sub-Committee, the Borough Council officers and the legal Advisor and explained their roles. 

The Applicant’s representative, Mr Paul Byatt and the Applicant, Mr Hasan introduced themselves.

The Responsible Authorities present: Vicky Conlon from Norfolk Trading Standards and Chris Brooks from Norfolk Constabulary introduced themselves.

At the request of the Chairman, the Legal Advisor outlined the procedure which would be followed at the Hearing.

The Licensing Manager presented his report to the Sub-Committee.  The Licensing Manager explained that an application had been made under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 203 for the sale of alcohol by retail.  If the application was granted it would allow the sale of alcohol from Monday to Sunday, 8am to 11pm.

The Licensing Manager made reference to the following:

-        The four Licensing Objectives.

-        The Mandatory Conditions and Conditions consistent with the operating schedule.

-        There had been two representations from the Responsible Authorities.  Norfolk Trading Standards and the Police were objecting to the application under the prevention of crime and disorder Licensing Objective.

-        There were no representations from ‘other persons’ to consider.

-        The advertising of the application.

-        The Borough Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

There were no questions to the Licensing Manager.  However, before proceeding with the Hearing it was noted that some of the information which would be provided by the Applicant and the Responsible Authorities were subject to ongoing police investigations.

The Legal Advisor explained that it was likely that the information to be put forward at the Hearing could prejudice the investigation if it was open to the public.  She explained that it was likely that confidential information would be referred to throughout the duration of the Hearing.

RESOLVED: That in accordance with Regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearing Regulations) 2005, the press and public be excluded from the Hearing.

The Applicant’s Representative presented his case.  The Applicant and his representative responded to questions from all parties.

Chris Brooks from Norfolk Constabulary presented his case.  He explained that he would be relying on the evidence from Norfolk Trading Standards.

Vicky Conlon, from Norfolk Trading Standards presented her case.  She referred to additional evidence which had been circulated to all parties in advance of the Hearing.

Norfolk Trading Standards called a witness to the Hearing.  The Witness responded to questions from Norfolk Trading Standards and then left the Hearing.

Vicky Conlon responded to questions from all parties.

The Licensing Manager summed up his case.  He requested that the Sub-Committee consider his report and the representations put forward at the Hearing and dispose of the matter with a view to promoting the four Licensing Objectives.  The options to the Panel were to:

a)     Grant the application under the terms and conditions applied;

b)     To grant the variation with conditions that the Sub-Committee considers appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives;

c)     To reject all or part of the application.

The Sub-Committee were reminded that full reasons for their decision must be given as all parties had a right of appeal against that decision to the Magistrates Court.

The Responsible Authorities present summed up their case.

The Applicant’s representative summed up his case.

The Council’s Legal Advisor stated that there were no outstanding matters to address.

The Sub-Committee retired to consider its decision in private, accompanied by the Democratic Services Officer and the Legal Advisor on specific points of law.

The reasons for the Decision were read out.

The Sub-Committee refused the application.