Meeting documents

RESOLVED (UNANIMOUS): that Councillor Rainsbury be appointed chairman for the meeting.

There were no apologies reported.

There were no declarations of interest declared.

The Licensing Panel reconsidered an application by Lancashire Constabulary for a review of a premises licence under Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003. This application was in respect of Spar, 222 Hoghton Lane, Hoghton.

?

Consideration of this matter was deferred by the Licensing Panel at its meeting held on 4 December 2012 because there had been several statements of facts but there was no clear evidence to substantiate those claims and therefore the panel felt that it was not in a position to determine the matter. Accordingly, at that meeting the panel allowed all parties a suitable period to obtain responses to twelve questions from the police, United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA), WWS Convenience Stores Ltd?s accountants and Spar.

?

With the permission of the panel and in accordance with the council?s hearing procedure, the Principal Solicitor briefly explained the background of this review and for ease of reference she circulated a copy of the bundle of responses received to date (the details as previously circulated to all parties prior to this meeting).

?

The applicant (the police?s representative, Sergeant Bushell), then addressed the panel and questions were asked. Mr Mahmood (Premises Licence Holder and Designated Premises Supervisor) accompanied by his legal representative and his brothers then addressed the panel and questions were asked.

?

Having fully considered the representations together with the evidence submitted, the panel retired to reach its decision. In reaching its decision the panel took into account the following:

?

? both written and oral evidence presented in connection with the hearing

? Licensing Act 2003

? S182 Amended Guidance of the Licensing Act 2003 and taken into account the references to the guidance

made by both parties

? South Ribble Borough Council?s Licensing Policy

?

RESOLVED (UNANIMOUS): that the application to revoke the premises licence in respect of Spar, 222 Hoghton Lane, Hoghton, be not granted for the reasons as set out below.

?

The panel ?

?

(i) initially considered whether any of the licensing objectives had been undermined. Their conclusion was that the objective of crime and disorder had been undermined.

?

In light of the above the panel went on to consider the options available which were:

?

? Do nothing

? Revoke

? Suspend the licence

? Remove Designated Premises Supervisior

? Apply/Modify the Conditions on the Licence

?

(ii) noted that as it had already concluded that the licensing objectives had been undermined they concluded that they did not have the option to do nothing. They discounted the option to revoke the licence as they felt that this would be a disproportionate step to redress the balance. They also discounted the option to suspend the licence as they did not feel that this would serve any useful purpose and did not wish to remove the Designated Premises Supervisor as they did not feel it would address the problem.

?

(iii) then went on to consider whether altering or adding conditions to the licence would be enough to redress the balance in respect of the licensing objectives and in particular the prevention of crime and disorder objective.

?

(iv) wished the conditions previously offered by the Premises Licence Holder at the hearing be added to the licence, namely:

?

?Before the employment of any staff at site whether paid or unpaid, sufficient identification documentation will be obtained (originals) and copies retained at site of any new employees. Such identification document should provide evidence to satisfy the Premises Licence Holder that the individuals in question are entitled to work within the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. Examples of identification documents to be retained are valid passport/visa. Such documents to be available for inspection by either the Licensing Authority or Police Officer upon request.?

?

(In addition, the panel issued a warning that procedures surrounding the employment of staff should be improved forthwith. That the employment of illegal immigrants was a serious matter that if proved would not be tolerated. As such there was no criticism of the police for bringing the review.)