8 Licensing Act 2003: Application for a Review of the Premises Licence at Best One, Lancashire Hill, Heaton Norris
To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.
The report details an application received on behalf of the Chief Officer of Greater Manchester Police for a review of the Premises Licence at Best One, Lancashire Hill, Heaton Norris.
The Sub-Committee is recommended to consider the application for the review of the premises licence at Best One.
Officer contact: Peter Cooke on 0161 474 4851 or email: peter.cooke@stockport.gov.uk
Additional documents:
Minutes:
A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing an application received on behalf of the Chief Officer of Greater Manchester Police, being a responsible authority under the Licensing Act 2003, exercising its statutory function to promote the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective for a review of the Premises Licence at Best One, Lancashire Hill, Heaton Norris.
A representative of the Chief Officer of Greater Manchester Police in addition to the Designated Premises Supervisor and his representative, attended the meeting and answered Councillors’ questions in relation to the application.
The Sub-Committee, having heard the interested parties, proceeded to consider the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective in respect of the application, together with the relevant parts of the Council’s Licensing Policy and the guidance from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. However, the decision was reached on consideration of all arguments given in relation to this specific application.
It was then
RESOLVED - That, having heard the application for a review of the premises licence at Best One, Lancashire Hill, Heaton Norris made on behalf of the Chief Officer of Greater Manchester Police, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that the premises licence holder had demonstrated its inability to satisfactorily promote the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective by virtue of the allegations of serious criminal activity made against the Designated Premises Supervisor who was also the owner of the business. The Sub-Committee further noted that the premises had failed to comply with the condition on the premises licence which stipulated that CCTV images had to be retained for a period of 21 days.
The Sub-Committee was of the view, that on the basis of the evidence presented, it was more likely than not that the Designated Premises Supervisor, as owner of the business, was responsible for the alleged actions and that the effect of these was to seriously undermine the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective. The Sub-Committee was also not satisfied that the premises would operate without significant and sustained control on the part of the current Designated Premises Supervisor and business owner should an alternative be appointed in his place as Designated Premises Supervisor.
The Sub-Committee has therefore determined that there were no further conditions that could be imposed which would ameliorate the concerns expressed by the representative of the Chief Officer of Greater Manchester Police, and the suspension of the licence would also fail to adequately promote the licensing objective, and accordingly it was determined that the Premises Licence should be revoked.