Agenda item

Report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services detailing an application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of Pizza Chicken Kebab Hot 2 You, 1A Bedford Place, Southampton  SO14 0JZ, attached.

The Sub-Committee considered an application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of Pizza Chicken Kebab Hot 2 You, 1A Bedford Place, Southampton SO14 0JZ.

Mr F Mozooni (on behalf of the applicant), Mr A Ghezal, (Applicant), PC Boucouvalas and PC Cherry (Hampshire Constabulary) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

The Sub-Committee considered the decision in confidential session in accordance with the Licensing Act (Hearings) Regulations 2005.

RESOLVED that the application to vary a premises licence be refused.

After private deliberation the Sub-Committee reconvened and the Chair read the following decision:-

All parties will receive formal written confirmation of the decision and reasons.

The Sub-Committee has considered very carefully the application for a variation of a premises licence at Pizza Chicken Hot 2 You, 1A Bedford Place. It has given due regard to the Licensing Act 2003, the Licensing Objectives, statutory guidance and the adopted statement of Licensing Policy.  Human Rights legislation was borne in mind whilst making the decision.

The Sub-Committee considered whether the application amounted to a substantial variation in accordance with the adopted statement of policy (CIP 2).  It was decided that the application did amount to a substantial variation despite a possible technical argument otherwise.  This was due to the potential impact of the variation in practical terms, effectively amounting to an extension of the period during which licensable activities may take place and the effect this would have in the area.  Accordingly, the Sub-Committee proceeded to apply the cumulative impact policy.

The Licensing and Gambling Sub-Committee considered the location of the premises and in particular the fact that it was located within an area identified as suffering from issues of crime, disorder and public nuisance - designated as a stress area in accordance with the licensing policy. 

The Committee noted in particular that:-

• one effect of the CIP is that a rebuttable presumption applies to applications for premises licences.

• The rebuttable presumption is that such applications shall ordinarily be refused

• Licensing Policy CIP2 16.9 provides that the onus is upon applicants to demonstrate through their Operating Schedule and where appropriate supporting evidence that the operation of the premises will not add to the cumulative impact already being experienced

The Sub-Committee was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the application would not lead to an increase in the issues of crime and disorder and associated nuisance, if granted. 

As a result the application to vary the licence is refused.

Reasons

The Sub-Committee noted carefully the points raised by the applicant, including, but not limited to,:

• that the premises does not serve alcohol;
• that safety measures will address the potential for crime and disorder (including security staff and CCTV);
• that issues with CCTV have now been resolved;
• that the issues with the premises were in the main historic and with previous owners;
• that other premises nearby currently have longer trading hours.

The Sub-Committee, despite careful consideration of the above, was not satisfied that the proposed application would not add to those issues already experienced.  The Sub-Committee noted legal advice provided during the hearing that it should not ordinarily consider the quality of management, the character or experience of the applicant, issues with regards whether the application is substantial and that the applicant has a good understanding of how to reduce crime as exceptions to the stress area policies or warrant departure therefrom.

The Sub-Committee was not persuaded by the application, nor reassured by the applicant during the course of the hearing.  It is accepted that many issues at the premises are historic and that the existing conditions were imposed following review whilst a different premises licence holder had control.  However, police evidence clearly showed that issues of concern continue, particularly in regard to trading beyond hours and the operation of CCTV at the premises.

There is a right of appeal for all parties to the Magistrates’ Court.  Formal notification of the decision will set out that right in full.