Councillor A Seldon was elected as Chairman for the Regulatory Sub-Committee hearing.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Cllr Vaughan-Powell

To receive any details of Members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the committee.

Cllr  C M Bartrum attended as substitute for Cllr Vaughan-Powell

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the agenda.

To consider an application for a premises licence in respect of  SuperSam, 141-143 Eign Street Hereford HR4 0AJ

Members of the Licensing Panel of the Council’s Regulatory Sub-Committee considered the above application, full details of which appeared before the Members in their agenda and the background papers.

Prior to making their decision the Members heard from Adrienne Poole, representing the Licensing Authority, , David Gough , presenting the Trading Standards representation and Mr. Patrick Burke – PMB Licensing,   solicitor  on behalf of the applicant.

The Chairman introduced item 5 on the agenda and invited all present to introduce themselves.

Adrianne Poole outlined the application as per the agenda document.

David Gough outlined Trading Standards objections based on Licensing Objectives i.e. Protecting children from harm and Crime and Disorder.

Mr Gough believed that there is continued communication between the applicant and the previous licence holder. However, there was no evidence that the previous licence holder does not continue to hold an interest in the premises.

Mr Gough wished to reserve right to apply conditions if the Premises licence is granted.

 The Chairman requested evidence of the lease in the applicant’s name and the solicitor stated that he has phone evidence that the lease is in place. The panel rejected this evidence stating they would require a hard copy.

Chairman adjourned meeting at 11:30 am  to allow time for copy of the lease to be faxed  to the Council’s legal adviser.

Meeting reconvened at 12:00 –

The Council’s legal adviser confirmed that he had received a Licence to assign the lease, certified as a true copy by solicitors in Wolverhampton. This was accepted by the panel.

The applicant’s solicitor was asked to confirm the date of lease assignment with the applicant’s solicitor confirming that all relevant documents have been completed.

The applicant was invited by the panel to state why the Premises Licence should be granted.

The applicant’s solicitor explained that his client had been in the UK for 10 years and had previously worked in West Bromwich with the previous Premises licence holder and therefore, does not deny that he knows the previous licence holder.

The Trading Standards objection relates to the premises and has nothing to do with the applicant.

 Stated that the applicant does know the previous applicant having worked with him previously, however, they are not friends. The applicant has purchased the property from the previous owner.

 Concerned that the applicant will be judged on the premises past record and stated that there is no such thing as good or bad premises only good or bad operators.

Applicant’s agent  sited Thwaites v Wirral Borough (case law).

 The Committee retired to consider the application.

Having carefully considered those matters brought before them, the Sub-Committee determined the application as follows, with a view to promoting the four licensing objectives, namely the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm, as set out in the guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, and the Council’s Licensing Policy:

The Licensing Panel of the Council’s Regulatory  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.