Minutes for Licensing Panel meeting, Aug 13 2009, 10.00AM official page

Flava

35 Market Street

Eastleigh

Hampshire

The Clerk outlined the application to transfer the licence including the current licensable activities and trading hours. 

The application had been referred to the Licensing Hearing Panel due to representations made by the Police under the licensing objective ‘Prevention of Crime and Disorder’.

In light of the additional evidence provided by the parties in relation to this matter the Council’s Legal Officer gave the following legal clarification on  what may be considered by the Panel:

Section 182 guidance:

“where the chief officer of police believes the transfer may undermine the crime prevention objective, the police may object to the transfer...” 

“..the police have evidence that the business or individuals seeking to hold the licence or business or individuals linked to such persons are involved in crime (or disorder)…”

 â€œThe authority’s consideration would be confined to the issue of the crime prevention objective and the hearing should not be permitted to stray into other extraneous matters. The burden would be on the police to demonstrate to the authority that there were good grounds for believing that the transfer of the licence would undermine the crime prevention objective.”

The Licensing Panel is therefore limited to issue of crime and disorder or any evidence from the Police “that the business or individuals seeking to hold the licence or business or individuals linked to such persons are involved in crime or disorder.”

Jonathan Smith of Poppleston Allen introduced representatives of Flava Night Club Limited;  Graham Simmonds, Joseph Borg and Charles Giles.  Mr Smith then outlined the application to transfer the licence.  When the application was first submitted it had been proposed that Mr Giles would be the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) however this was no longer the case.  Mr Borg, who had many years experience in the licensed/club trade prior to retiring,  had now obtained a Personal Licence and was the proposed DPS.  Mr Giles’ involvement would now be only as an investor and he would not be playing any part in the day to day running of the Club after its opening. 

Mr Peter Spinks attended on behalf of Hampshire Constabulary and presented their representation, previously submitted in writing.  The majority of the Police objections to the application were in connection with Mr Giles involvement in the Club.  Mr Spinks expressed doubts that Mr Giles’ was no longer to be involved in the day to day running, and drew attention to the fact that the company was registered to Mr Giles’ personal address.  Problems that had been encountered at another club run by Mr Giles in the past were highlighted.

The Panel withdraw to make their decision 

The Panel withdrew from the meeting to make their decision and invited the Clerk and Legal Adviser to join them.

When the Panel reconvened and prior to the decision, the legal officer outlined legal advice given to Councillors during closed session:

“When determining the application the members can only reject the application taking the following into consideration:

Section 44 (5) Licensing Act 2003:-

(5)     Where a notice is given under section 42(6) (and not withdrawn), and subsection (3) above does not apply, the authority must—

…..

(b)     having regard to the notice, reject the application if it considers it necessary for the promotion of the crime prevention objective to do so.

Section 182 Statutory Guidance at para 8.68:

“…that there [are] good grounds for believing that the transfer of the licence would undermine the crime prevention objective””

The Chair of the Panel then read the following decision:

“The Panel have considered the Licensing Act 2003, Statutory Guidance, The Eastleigh Borough Council Statement of Licensing Policy, the report and substantial evidence contained therein as well as all representations both parties made at the hearing today, and the decision of the  Panel having considered all the evidence is to transfer the licence. 

REASONS:

The Panel have accepted representations by the applicants which addresses concerns regarding the link with Mr Giles to Crime and Disorder as raised by the Police.  The Panel accept that Mr Borg is intended to be the Designated Premises Supervisor and will run the Club on a day to day basis, and that Mr Giles’ involvement is on an investment basis only once the Club has opened, and will have no further part in the day to day running of the premises.

Both parties should be made aware that there is a right of appeal against this decision and any such appeal should be made to the Magistrates Court within 21 days of formal notification of this decision.

The full details of the decision together with reasons for granting this transfer will be forwarded to all the parties and posted on the Council’s website as soon as possible.”