Brighton & Hove City Council
Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)
10.00am 29 April 2026
Virtual
MINUTES
|
Present: Councillors: Cattell, Hewitt and Lyons
|
|
Officers: Sarah Cornell (Senior Licensing Officer), Donna Lynsdale (Fair-Trading Officer), Rebecca Siddell (Lawyer), Hannah Staplehurst (Sussex Police Licensing Officer), and Shaun Hughes (Democratic Services Officer) |
PART ONE
1 To appoint a Chair for the Meeting
1.1 Councillor Cattell was appointed Chair for the meeting.
2 Procedural Business
a) Declaration of Substitutes
2.1 There were none.
b) Declarations of Interest
2.2 There were none.
c) Exclusion of the Press and Public
2.3 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’), the Licensing Panel considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press or public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I of the Act).
2.4 RESOLVED - That the press and public would not be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Item 3.
3 Islingword Local - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)
3.1 The Senior Licensing officer introduced the application to the panel.
3.2 Sussex Police Licensing officer stated that Sussex Police objected to the application for a new alcohol licence which was located in the Special Stress Area (SSA). The application was to sell alcohol from 08.00 to 23.00 every day. Crime and disorder reports were high in the area, therefore unique reasons to grant permission were required. The suggested conditions submitted by the applicant’s agent were not sufficient. The Police crime stats were confirmed, however, those submitted by the agent were not. The panel were requested to refuse the application.
3.3 Following questions Councillors were informed by Sussex Police that it appeared that the applicant’s agent stated stats came from a website. The Sussex Police stats came directly from their own system and included a larger area, which included open spaces. The objector’s agent was informed that Sussex Police were requesting a refusal and only suggested conditions in case the panel decided to grant permission. The applicant’s agent was informed that Sussex Police agreed the suggested conditions and submitted conditions by the applicant were similar.
3.4 It was confirmed by the applicant’s agent that stats submitted were from the national police website and were focused on Elm Grove ward. It was also noted that 75% of the front window would be clear to allow views of outside and there would be no alcohol promotions. The agent suggested a finish time of 22.00 instead of 23.00 if the Police were supportive.
3.5 The Fair-Trading Officer made a presentation on the application. It was stated that there had been a breach of conditions at another store run by the applicant.
3.6 Following questions the panel and agents were informed by the Fair-Trading officer that until the applicant’s submission was received, the day before the panel met, the other shops run by the applicant were not considered. However, it was noted that following the breach of conditions the applicant had rectified the situation and two security officers were now located on the door. The breach occurred when the Fair-Trading officer made a routine visit to the premises late at night.
3.7 The agent acting on behalf of an objecting business stated that the breach at the other premises was a concern. The panel should note that the Special Stress Area (SSA) was still in place and matrix works very well as a guide to the licensing objectives and encourages diversity. The applicant needs to prove the exception to the regulations. The stats submitted by the applicant focused on a few roads only, not the whole area. It was noted that Sussex Police considered that granting the application would result in an increase in street drinking. The evidence supported a refusal.
3.8 Following questions the panel and applicant’s agents were informed by the agent acting on behalf of the objecting party that the objecting business was Queens Park Wines, which was granted by a licensing panel in 2010 to serve alcohol till 23.30 every day.
3.9 The applicant’s agents addressed the panel and stated that they apologised for the late submission of details related to the application. The breach at the other location was not necessarily a ‘nail in the coffin’ of this current application. The application is for a convenience store that also sells alcohol, and no high strength alcohol. The hours of sale could be reduced to 22.00 if the panel wish. An apology was given for the lack of pre application engagement, but now the agent wanted to engage. The granting of permission with the suggested conditions would mitigate any issues. The applicant wants to run a local convenience store for the local community. It was considered that street drinkers look for weak leadership to exploit. The applicant has no intension of allowing any street drinking. The applicant is a helpful and responsible person as highlighted by the supporting statements.
3.10 Following questions the panel and officers were informed by the applicant and the applicant’s agents that the store would supply the local community with a variety of everyday things, and the sale of alcohol formed only a small part of the business. This will attract customers who want everything in one place. For the first hour of opening between 07.00 and 08.00 the alcohol would be screened from customers. High strength spirits will be behind the counter, and the remainder will be on shelves and in a fridge.
3.11 Following questions the panel and officers were informed by the applicant and the applicant’s agents that the condition 18 related to the sale of illicit alcohol and condition 20, the labelling of alcohol bottles to illustrate where it was obtained from. The layout of the shop was not such an issue as city centre shops where shoplifting was an issue. The staff will be trained to deal with issues. Spirts are to be located behind the counter and other alcohol can be added to this. Two members of staff will work in the shop at busy times. The applicant is a member of the crime reduction unit and is happy to have call radios at the new store. ‘Challenge 25’ posters will be displayed. The applicant is always available whenever needed and will be working at the new shop. The applicant employed agents for the previous licensing applications. It was understood that the sale of alcohol to an intoxicated person was illegal. It was confirmed that the breach of conditions at another premises was due to the second security officer being off sick and the other being in a car outside the shop down the street. The applicant had rectified the situation as soon as they were emailed by the Fair-Trading officer.
Summaries
3.12 The Senior Licensing Officer summarised their statement.
3.13 The Fair-Trading Officer summarised their statement.
3.14 The Sussex Police Licensing Officer summarised their statement.
3.15 The objector’s agent summarised their statement.
3.16 The applicant’s agents summarised their statement.
3.17 The Chair stated the panel would retire and consider the application and closed the meeting.
The meeting concluded at 12.39pm
|
Signed
|
Chair |
||
|
Dated this |
day of |
|
|