Agenda and draft minutes

Please note this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method.  Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on.  By entering the ‘meeting room’, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual, or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

MOVED by Councillor Nick da Costa, SECONDED by Councillor Kaushika Amin,

RESOLVED: That Councillor Lester Buxton be elected as Chair for the meeting.

The Chair referred to the filming of meetings and this information was noted.  

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies had been received from Councillor Sheila Peacock, Councillor Lester Buxton was substituting in her place.

It being a special meeting of the Sub Committee, under Part Four, Section B, Paragraph 17, of the Council’s Constitution, no other business shall be considered at the meeting.

There was no urgent business.  

There were no declarations of interest.  

The Sub-Committee will first hear from the Licensing Officer.  After that, the applicant will present their application and the Sub-Committee and objectors will have the opportunity to ask questions. Then, the objectors will present their case and the Sub-Committee and objectors will have the opportunity to ask questions. 

All parties will then have the opportunity to sum up, and then the meeting will conclude to allow the Sub-Committee to deliberate and reach a decision. This decision will then be provided in writing within five working days of this meeting.

The Chair provided a summary of the procedure for the meeting.  

To consider an application for a review of a premises licence.

Shortly before the meeting opened, the Sub-Committee was informed that the licence holder’s representative sought an adjournment.

Mr David Dadds, the licence holder’s representative, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         He required more time to prepare for the hearing and had been given further documentation in the prior week, but had not been able to address all of it.

·         All efforts had been made to go through all documents given to him but he had not had the opportunity to go through all of the documentation with the licence holder.

·         He wished to submit video evidence and had not been able to do this.

·         In relation to providing his representation to the Sub-Committee, he had at least 38 observations to make and this would take at least an hour and a half. All parties would need time to go through the information.

·         He wished to make some serious allegations regarding how the papers had been presented and to ensure that the case was put forward in a proper manner.

·         He had not had the time to prepare and respond in a meaningful way. If the representation was rushed, it would be unfair on the licence holder.

·         Timing, preparation and equity of arms was important.

·         It was more likely that it was suitable that the case be heard during the day rather than during the evening in order to avoid the meeting running into the late hours of the night.

The Chair stated that the letter from Catherine West MP would be disregarded as part of the hearing and the Sub-Committee sought further detail on which documentation specifically was being referred to at this point.

In response to questions, Mr Dadds informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         When he received the additional papers on 23 July 2025, he was able to compare it against the papers that had already been submitted. There were some additional papers and it had taken him about 10 hours to go through the all data.

·         On Thursday of the prior week, an additional 160 papers had been submitted. Although some of these documents were duplications, he had spent five hours going through the papers. However, he had not had time to go through them fully with the licence holder and to look at the CCTV evidence available to him.

·         He had done his best to go through all the documentation and evidence, but could not do this over the weekend because he had two hearings the day before this meeting and he had used all the time available to him.

·         There was provision to allow the Sub-Committee to adjourn for the sake of the public interest.

Mr James Rankin, representing the Police, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         He objected to the application to adjourn in the strongest possible terms.

·         This would be a third adjournment in relation to the hearing.

·         The original hearing was listed for 16 June 2025 and had been initially adjourned upon the request made by the licence holder’s representative. The hearing was relisted for 3 July  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider any items of urgent business as identified at item 3.

There were no new items of urgent business.