Venue: MS Teams
Contact: Emma Perry, Principal Committee Co-ordinator
Note: Webcast: use the link on the agenda front sheet or paste the following into your browser https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_N2U5OTQ5OGMtMWUzNi00Yzk4LWFkNzgtZTc5NTJhYWU4ODQ0%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%226ddfa760-8cd5-44a8-8e48-d8ca487731c3%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%228a500144-a59b-44b4-a40d-ec469273f784%22%2c%22IsBroadcastMeeting%22%3atrue%7d&btype=a&role=a
FILMING AT MEETINGS
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.
The Chair advised that the meeting would be live streamed on the Council’s website.
Apologies for Absence
There were no apologies for absence.
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.
It was noted that, it being a special meeting of the Sub-Committee, under Part Four, Section B, Paragraph 17 of the Council’s Constitution, no other business would be considered at the meeting.
Declarations of Interest
A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:
(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and
(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.
A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.
Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.
There were no declarations of interest.
Daliah Barrett, Licensing Officer, introduced the report, as set out on pages 1-4 of the agenda. Reference was also made to the additional information submitted by the Agent.
Philip Cone, Licensing Enforcement Officer, introduced his representation as detailed on pages 11-15 of the agenda. He referred to the prohibition notice issued on the 5 December 2020, which had received no objection or appeal.
PC Derek Ewart introduced the Police representation, as detailed on pages 43-48 of the agenda.
Maria Ahmad, Public Health, outlined her representation, as detailed on page 41 of the agenda. Public Health had concerns under the Prevention of Crime and Disorder, Public Safety and the Prevention of Public Nuisance licensing objectives. Public Health supported the request to suspend the premises licence and were deeply concerned by the Designated Premises Licence holder’s lack of regard to the law to protect the public and uphold the licensing objectives.
Marlene D’Aguilar, Public Health, also added that the operators of the premises had given no due care and attention that they could have spread Covid during a time when the number of cases within the borough were increasing and had a total disregard for people’s safety.
In response to a point of clarification from the Committee, the Police confirmed that there had been hot beverages, shisha pipes and gambling materials at the premises at the time of their visit.
In response to a question from Graham Hopkins, Agent, Philip Cone stated that officers had body worn cameras on their visits, however there was no photo evidence of the people inside the premises on the visits made.
In response to a further question from Graham Hopkins regarding social distancing during the incidents raised, Maria Ahmad stated that given the hot beverages present and layouts of the tables within the premises during that time, it was suggested that the 2m distance had not been adhered to. Daliah Barrett added that the issue of social distancing was irrelevant, given that on the 1 February 2021 the country was in a national lockdown and therefore the premises should not have been open, apart from for takeaway and deliveries.
It was also noted on the Police representation that on the 1 February 2021 the till had recorded 10 tables served on this date, which added to the evidence that the premises had been open and a number of people in attendance on that date.
Graham Hopkins, Agent, outlined his representation to the application for a review, as follows:
· Mr Ozbek had operated the premises since 2014, which was a restaurant and lounge catering for a maximum of 60 people, employing 15 members of staff.
· The dining service was currently operated as a takeaway and click and collect delivery service as well as a home delivery shisha service.
· There had been fewer staff on the premises during the pandemic, with 2 in attendance on the 1st February 2021 when the Police visit took place.
· Evidence was shown from the media company, detailing that they were ... view the full minutes text for item 5.