Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that Councillor M F L Durham, CC be appointed Chairman for the meeting.

IN THE CHAIR: COUNCILLOR M F L DURHAM

The Chairman drew attention to the list of notices published on the back of the agenda.

There were none.

To disclose the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, other Pecuniary Interest or Non-Pecuniary Interests relating to items of business on the agenda having regard to paragraphs 6 – 8 of the Code of Conduct for Members.

(Members are reminded that they are also required to disclose any such interest as soon as they become aware should the need arise through the meeting.)

There were none.

To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery, (copy enclosed).

The Chairman sought confirmation that all present were in possession of and had read the report of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance along with Appendices A – E.

The Licensing Officer outlined the application for review of the Premises Licence at the Village Tandoori, 11 High Street, Southminster, CM0 7AA.

The Chairman then explained the procedures that would be followed and invited Mr Nigel Dermott, Licensing Officer for Essex Police to make his opening statement.

Mr Dermott took the Committee through his submitted statement and referred to a number of intelligence items which were detailed in the application for review as submitted by the Police.  He advised that the Premises Licence Holder had failed to support the licensing objectives, namely the prevention of crime and disorder.  Mr Dermott explained that the employment of illegal workers was considered by Essex Police to be a serious crime, making reference to the national guidance provided by Section 182 to the Licensing Act 2003 and how in the Police’s view revocation of the licence was the advised outcome.  During his statement Mr Dermott referred to an incident in 2015 relating to the premises, relevant case law and the Home Office Guidance for Licensing Authorities to Prevent Illegal Working in Licensed Premises in England and Wales (6 April 2017) particularly paragraphs 11.27 and 11.28 which defined such incidents as a serious matter.  He advised that Essex Police’s expectation was that the licence in this matter be revoked.

As a point of clarification Mr Quelch, the Council’s Solicitor, drew Members’ attention to paragraph 11.28 of the national guidance which stated “…where reviews arise and the licensing authority determines that the crime prevention objective is being undermined through the premises being used to further crimes, it is expected that revocation of the licence – even in the first instance – should be seriously considered”.

Mr Dermott advised that he would not be calling any other witnesses.

The Chairman then invited the applicant’s legal representative, Mr Mohammed Chowdhury to make his opening statement to the Committee.  Mr Chowdhury provided the Committee with some background information regarding Mr Rashid, and the licence for this premise.  In respect of the submission from Essex Police and evidence submitted, Mr Chowdhury provided the Committee with a great deal of detail regarding the current arrangements in relation to the premises and Mr Rashid’s response to the points raised by the Police. 

At this point Members were advised that Mr Rashid was willing to give an undertaking to keep records as required by the Home Office which would be available for inspection by the authorities and to have this added as a condition of the licence.  Mr Chowdhury outlined how Mr Rashid now understood the requirements for his licence to be available and would take steps to ensure this.  Mr Rashid’s Solicitor questioned the submissions regarding the Bassetlaw case law as this was not relevant to this application as it related to underage drinking.  Mr Chowdhury advised that Mr Rashid was remorseful  ...  view the full minutes text for item 233.

RESOLVED that the meeting be adjourned at 3:51pm.

RESOLVED that the meeting resumes in open session at 4:19pm.

The Chairman advised that the Licensing Sub-Committee had reviewed all of the statements provided and the various submissions.  It had listened to the statement by the Police Licensing Officer and the Licence holder and taking everything into consideration it was the decision of the Sub-Committee to agree the applicants request and revoke the premises licence to serve alcohol relating to this premises.  The Chairman then outlined the reasons behind the Committee’s decision, as follows:

It was very clear that Mr Rashid understood the intricacies of the UK Pay As You Earn (PAYE) and Value Added Tax (VAT) legislation but had failed to check other important legislation such as the illegibility to work in the UK legally.  There was also evidence that this was not the first offence, going back to the Police statement that in 2015 the Police uncovered another person who had allegedly worked at the premises illegally and it was presumed that they were not a family member.

Secondly, Mr Rasheed clearly did not take his responsibilities of being a personal licence holder or the Designated Premises Supervisor seriously or even understand them when questioned.

The Panel would expect someone of 17 years’ experience to check the right to work status and there can be no excuse not to do so.  Evidence from the Police show that no records or systems whatsoever were in place proving that checks had been made.

The Chairman advised Mr Rashid that he had 21 days (from the date of this hearing) in which to appeal the decision of the Council to the Magistrate’s Court.

RESOLVED that the premises licence for the Village Tandoori, 11 High Street, Southminster, CM0 7RR be revoked.

The Chairman thanked all parties for attending, their submissions and advised that a formal decision would be notified to all interested parties.