Agenda and minutes

Councillor Poole welcomed everyone to the meeting and informed those present that the procedure was as detailed in the agenda papers.

Councillor Doolan submitted apologies for absence.

None.

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

*(a)     Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b) Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c) Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works, between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d) Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e) Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f) Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g) Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

None.

The order of business would be as the agenda.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 26 January 2016 be confirmed as a correct record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The licensing officer reported that he had received verbal notification that the resident in attendance was to speak on behalf of the interested party.  However, written confirmation had not yet been received. The resident stated that an email had been sent to the licensing team that day.  The applicant’s representative agreed that the resident be allowed to speak on behalf of the interested party.

The local resident stated that she had visited the premises and considered that it looked appealing to young people.  There was outdoor heating and a happy hour Monday to Friday.  She stated that there had been vertical drinking in the premises and this variation would be used as a lever to further increase hours to 02:30am.  She considered that this was a dangerous precedent and that an application could be made for premises to open as a specialist café and then have a variation agreed for a licence which had little to do with the original application. 

The applicant’s representative stated that this was a Cuban café with a coffee roaster which served homemade Cuban recipes and fruit juice.  Eight full-time kitchen staff were employed and the applicant had invested 1 million in the premises.  This was a food led establishment where 80% of sales were food. Existing conditions of the licence required that, there would be no vertical drinking, no drinking outside the premises, alcohol would be only served with food and there would be no off sales.  These conditions were observed.  No regulatory issues or complaints had been received during the operation of the premises. This was an application within policy.  The original application had been determined within licensing policies 6 and 8.  The application was within licensing policy framework hours and planning permission had also been granted for these hours.  No objections had been received from the responsible authorities and the premises had been visited by the police and licensing officers who had been complimentary about the business.  There had been no objections from neighbours or those living on an obvious route to and from the premises.  The client had invited the interested party to the premises to look at the operation but had received no response.  The premises had complied with their licence, was a credit to Islington, was within policy guidelines and the application should be approved.

In response to questions, the applicant’s representative stated that this application was not a precursor to an application for a night club.  The current hours, which did not allow alcohol to be sold after 8.30pm, meant that people did not come into the premises to eat in the evening.  The police had not objected and they would have done so if there was a crime risk.  The premises had given no regulatory concern and it was expected that the conditions would provide assurance.  The applicant’s representative stated that because of the early hour for the sale of alcohol he was finding that the premises had lost business in the evening.  He had tried to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 111.

The licensing officer reported that there had been one resident objection to the application.

The applicant stated he ran a business with his brother and when he had left a friend had convinced him to apply for an alcohol licence for the restaurant.  He had never needed to call the police during the time he had been operating the premises.

In response to questions he understood that he needed to abide by the conditions of the licence.  The applicant gave an example of when he had refused to sell alcohol to a customer when they held a temporary event notice for the Barcelona game.  He stated he would only buy alcohol from reputed sellers.

RESOLVED

1)     That the application for a new premises licence in respect of Mamma Mia, 12 Hornsey Road, N7 7BP be grantedto permit the on sales of alcohol at the premises on Monday to Sunday from 12:00 to 22:00 hours.

2)     Conditions in appendix 3 on page 63 of the agenda shall be applied to the licence.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Sub-Committee listened to all the evidence and submissions and read all the material. The Sub-Committee reached the decision having given consideration to the Licensing Act 2003, as amended, and its regulations, the national guidance and the Council’s Licensing Policy.

There was one local resident objection.  There had been no representations made by the responsible authorities. The Sub-Committee noted that the applicant had co-operated with the police and environmental health and agreed a number of conditions which would ensure that the licensing objectives would be upheld.

The Sub-Committee noted that the hours sought were within the hours specified in licensing policy 8.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence that the applicant had been granted a couple of TENs recently and there had been no issues arising as a result. 

The applicant, trading standards reported that the recommendations were set out in the agenda.  He raised concerns that the licensee had failed to dismiss a member of staff who had committed a criminal offence.  There had been several breaches of licence conditions and he had failed to update the address on both the premises and personal licences. Super strength beer was on the premises at a cheap price of £1.50 and the reason for this had not been adequately explained.  The price on the invoice provided for these beers ranged from £1.65 to £1.80.  The cheap price made it attractive for those people with alcohol problems.  The lack of invoices also suggested that the alcohol may not have been purchased from a legitimate source.  He stated that if the Sub-Committee believed the applicant the licence be suspended and additional conditions imposed.  If the Sub-Committee did not believe the applicant he considered that the most appropriate decision was revocation. 

In response to questions, it was noted that no alcohol was sold during a couple of test purchases and there were no reasons to believe that there were any issues regarding alcohol after 2011. 

The licensee, represented by a translator, stated that he had taken full responsibility for the tobacco in the premises.  He stated that he would transfer the licence and have a break from the business.  He would not want to lose the licence. Regarding the high strength beers, he reported that he had wanted to do a stock clearance and that was why the beers had been cheap.

In response to questions, he stated that the tobacco had been sold without his knowledge by a member of staff.  There was quite a significant amount of tobacco that had been hidden in a chocolate box on the shelf and he did not notice.  He now made two CCTV checks each day. He paid the fee for the change of licence address but this had not been done.  He stated that the member of staff had apologised and said he would cover the costs so he did not sack him.  Staff had been trained over the past three years but a note had not been made of the training given.  The Sub-Committee considered that if the member of staff had been trained then he would have known of the offence, if he had not been trained it would bring the management into question.  The staff member had bought the tobacco for personal use and then had given up smoking and had brought it into the shop to sell. 

The applicant stated he had trained his staff and he was keeping an eye on the staff through the CCTV.  The tobacco sales had been made without his knowledge but this would not happen again.

The trading standards officer reported that there was no indication of a clearance sale marked on the beers. 

RESOLVED that the premises licence for Essex Alternative Supermarket, 360 Essex Road, N1 3PD be revoked.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.