, 23 January 2025 - 6 February 2025

skip navigation and tools

Decisions

Decisions published

30/01/2025 - City Plan Consultation ref: 7390    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

That the Petition be noted.


30/01/2025 - Royal Sussex County Hospital Accident & Emergency Department ref: 7400    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)     Request that the Leader of the Council write to the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust to request that :-

a.     A a contingency plan is put in place for adding short-term capacity while redevelopment is in progress.

b.     A detailed analysis is shared with the Council of the planning, specification and futureproofing of the new look A&E, with updated time scales for delivery.

2)     Request officers to consider, alongside local NHS providers, how to reduce demand through enhanced signposting and redirection, as well as through increased take up of vaccinations against flu, covid and other respiratory diseases.


30/01/2025 - Supporting Unison’s Bring It Back Campaign ref: 7398    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

Resolved to:

1)     Continue fighting for the best funding deal for local government and residents in Brighton & Hove.

2)     Ensure that staff are made aware of the opportunities open to them to join a Union

3)     Welcome the recent increases in funding to local government, and the significant reduction in the budget gap faced by this authority for 2025/26.

4)     Continue to make the case for sustainable long-term funding for local government in the upcoming spending review.

5)     Welcome the reintroduction of public engagement in the budget setting process this year, including an online budget simulator, and to encourage further such activities in future budget years.


30/01/2025 - Maintaining quality education for all ref: 7397    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)     Prioritise children receiving the best education possible either within the Local Authority or as part of an academy chain or free school as it works to develop its “family of schools” and all other policies relating to education.

 

2)     Acknowledge the legal right of schools to enter into discussions with academy chains and urge that they do so with information that is fair and balanced on the benefits of the high quality offer that the local authority provides to help ensure our children do continue to receive quality education and parents do have choice.


30/01/2025 - Gritting & Highways Winter Service Plan ref: 7399    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)     Request the Administration to undertake its annual review of the city’s 400 grit bins, while looking at additional sites for some relocated grit bins and grit drops as requirements necessitate.

2)     Thank officers for their prompt response as the council dealt with the sudden heavy snowfall across Brighton and Hove this month when heavy rainfall was forecast.

3)     Thank members of the community who came out to help others as well as to clear snow and ice, such as farmers who rescued cars in Woodingdean, school communities who helped colleagues, and residents who helped assist their neighbours in a wonderful show of solidarity.


30/01/2025 - Budget Protocol ref: 7394    For Determination

This report sets out the format, protocol and procedures to be followed at the budget and Council Tax setting meeting of the full Council ('Budget Council') on 27 February 2025.

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

1)     That the budget protocol outlined in Appendix 1 be approved for use at the Budget Council meeting on the 27 February 2025.

 

2)     That the Legal Advice Note as set out at Appendix 2 be noted.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Nigel Manvell


30/01/2025 - Pay Policy Statement 2025/26 ref: 7393    Recommendations Approved

The Localism Act 2011 requires local authorities to produce a pay policy statement to be approved by Council annually before the start of the financial year to which it relates. The aim is to increase accountability, transparency, and fairness in the setting of local pay.

The pay policy statement sets out the council’s policies on a range of issues relating to the pay of its workforce, particularly its senior and lowest paid staff. It summarises the parameters within which staff are paid and describes the parameters being governed by a local pay framework set with reference to national terms and conditions, and nationally agreed pay awards.

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

1)     That Full Council adopts the pay policy statement for 2025/26 attached at Appendix 1.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Laura Rush


30/01/2025 - Devolution Update ref: 7396    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

That full Council

 

1)     Noted the report, recommendations and Minutes Extract of the Special Cabinet meeting held on 9 January 2025.


30/01/2025 - Review of Scheme for Member Allowances 2024-2028 ref: 7395    For Determination

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

That full Council

 

1)     Noted the proposed review of the members allowances scheme to take place in March 2025;

 

2)     Approved the appointment and re-appointment of IRP Panel members for a period of 3 years as set out at paragraph 3.7 – 3.8 of the report.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Anthony Soyinka


22/10/2024 - Thingslicious Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7387    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 22/10/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 22/10/2024


22/10/2024 - Thingslicious TEN's Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7388    For Determination

Notification of Temporary Event Notices under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 22/10/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 22/10/2024

Decision:

Licensing Act 2003 – Hearing Notification of the Determination of the Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) held on Tuesday 22nd October 2022.

Having considered the objection notice and submissions from Sussex Police and submissions on behalf of the premises user, the Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) resolved to give the premises user a counter notice. The effect of this counter notice is to prevent the events from going ahead.

The panel considered that the issue of a counter notice for both events was appropriate for the promotion of the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance and public safety licensing objectives.

 

The police had concerns about the location and timing of the events. The location of the premises is in the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) as identified in the Statement of Licensing Policy. The event proposed is the extension of hours for sale of alcohol off the premises. Preston Street itself is an area of concern for the police with a high number of licensed premises. Crime figures were cited as was the concern about proximity to the beach and the likelihood of alcohol being consumed there and the risk this posed.  The police considered that the use of a Temporary Event Notice to extend hours in this way in the absence of any event as such was also inappropriate and against the spirit of the legislation and guidance. The statement of licensing policy referred to this at 3.7.1.

Overall, they considered that this extension was likely to undermine the licensing objectives and further challenge their resources.  On behalf of the applicant and premises user it was stressed that these applications were valid temporary event notices within the Act and guidance and were lodged in order to evaluate demand and inform a possible future variation application. They also wished to apply for further event notices in the Christmas festive period. The conditions on the current licence would be continued for the event period including a potential mobile support unit. The event extension on the 12/13th October took place without issue and the premises is run very responsibly. The panel was asked to support small business and allow the event to take place. It was noted by the police and confirmed that the applicant was involved in another premises in Preston

Street which was licensed for sale of alcohol off the premises to 03:00 hours.


The panel must decide these applications on their merits and take appropriate action to promote the licensing objectives. The panel do share the police concerns that the extension of hours for sale of alcohol off the premises in this location which is challenging and in the CIZ will have a negative impact on the licensing objectives especially the prevention of crime and disorder and public nuisance, and public safety. It is noted that the Statement of Licensing policy states at 3.7 that applications at existing premises will not be encouraged where the proposal is simply to extend the hours of operation and that applications within the CIZ would be scrutinised.  The police have provided evidence of the challenges this area faces and the associated crime and disorder and public nuisance and the panel notes it is difficult often to attribute incidents to a particular premises as many will take place once away from a licensed premises and this location is within the CIZ. Door security was discussed but the panel did not have the legal power to add it as a condition and in any event did not consider it would necessarily mitigate the risk.  Overall, the panel believes that these temporary events will not promote the licensing objectives and it is appropriate to give this counter notice for both events.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s web-site under the rubric ‘Your Council’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

1. The premises user may appeal against the decision to give a counter notice.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of the date of this notice.

No appeal may be brought later than five working days before the day on which the event period specified in the temporary event notice begins.

Date 22nd October 2024

 

Wards affected: Regency;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle


25/01/2024 - The Mona Lisa Lincensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7386    For Determination

Application for a Variation of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 25/01/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 25/01/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held on Thursday 25th January 2024 virtually via Teams in respect of the application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of premises known as Mona Lisa, 89 St James’s Street, Brighton, BN2 1TP.

 

The Panel has considered all the papers including the report and relevant representations and listened to the submissions made today. The application is situated within the cumulative impact zone (CIZ). Our policy states that applications for variations which are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will be refused following relevant representations. This presumption can be rebutted by the applicant if they can show that their application will have no negative cumulative impact.

 

This special policy can only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. However, the policy is not absolute. The panel must consider the individual circumstances and merits of the application. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of the area, it may be granted.

The application seeks to add sale of alcohol on the premises to the existing late night refreshment activity from 12:00 to 00:00 every day. Two representations against the application have been made by the police, and licensing authority. The representations had concerns regarding the prevention of crime and disorder, public nuisance and cumulative impact.

 

The police were concerned about the location of the premises in the CIZ and St James’s street in particular which has a problem profile and high levels of crime and disorder. Split licence venues can also cause people confusion and create problems in managing the change from restaurant to late night takeaway. Their concern was furthered by a history of the premises breaching their current licence on two occasions, on 1st January 2024 and during Pride 2022. The conditions offered, while welcomed, did not go far enough and did not address the policy concerns.

 

The licensing authority also had concerns about the location of the premises within theCIZ and explained the breach of the licence during Pride 2022 when the premises was open and trading when the licence had been suspended due to non-payment of fees and had not been transferred. Due to the previous breaches the licensing authority did not have confidence in the applicant to operate this type of licence and comply with conditions. 


Both responsible authorities recommended refusal of the application. The applicant was not present at the hearing and his agent Deyra Teke spoke on his behalf in support of the application. There had been consultation with the licensing authority and conditions proposed. The applicant was aware of the concerns regarding location and in terms of the split licence, the alcohol would not be on display and only for on sales only visible to those who were seated. The applicant was willing to take on board changes and conditions such as no sale of alcohol to the outside seating area. The sale of alcohol would end when the restaurant closed each day. In terms of previous breaches there was some misunderstanding about the completion of the transfer application and the breach on 1st January was explained as being 15 minutes over for a special customer. Staff training would reinforce conditions.

 

The panel asked detailed questions of the agent in order to try and clarify and confirm the manner in which it was intended that the business would operate around its limited space and staff as well as the visibility of both the outside and inside seating area.

 

The panel has considered this application on its individual merits and is mindful of the location within a particularly challenging part of the CIZ. The panel was concerned that the application was not well enough thought out in the context of the location and our policy. The panel regretted that the applicant was not present at the hearing which was not helpful. The agent had answered questions in an open and honest manner, but the panel felt that there was insufficient assurance given about how to manage potential incidents and the challenges of a split licence of this nature.

The panel shared the police concerns in this respect. Furthermore, it was considered that there were not enough measures to mitigate the real risk in this location. There was also concern about limited visibility within the premises. The previous breaches, though not the overriding consideration, also did not give the panel confidence that the applicant would abide by the conditions and terms of the licence and shared the police and licensing authority concerns in this respect. Overall, the panel considered that granting the application as it stood would be likely to add to problems of cumulative impact and undermine the licensing objectives. The application was therefore refused.

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s web-site under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.   The applicant may appeal against the decision to reject the application.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed

delivery of this letter. A fee is payable on the lodging of an appeal.

Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

Wards affected: Kemptown;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle, Levente Nagy


18/01/2024 - One Under Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7385    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 18/01/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 18/01/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Thursday 18th January 2024 in respect of the application for a premises licence in respect of premises known as One Under, Unit 3, the Savoy Centre, 10 Pool Valley, Brighton, BN1 1NJ

 

The Panel has read all the papers including the report, relevant representations and supplementary documentation from the applicant and has listened carefully to all the submissions made at the

hearing. The panel has also considered the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and the statutory guidance.

 

This is an application for a new premises licence within the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and therefore subject to the special policy on cumulative impact as set out in the Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

Our policy states that applications for new premises licences will be refused following relevant representations unless the applicant has demonstrated that their application will have no negative cumulative impact. The special policy will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances.

 

However, the policy is not absolute. Upon receipt of a relevant representation, the licensing authority will always consider the circumstances of each case and whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify departing from its special policy in the light of the individual circumstances of the case. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of an area, it may be granted. The impact can be expected to be different for premises with different styles and characteristics. For example, while a large nightclub or high capacity public house might add to problems of cumulative impact, a small restaurant, theatre or live music venue (where alcohol is not the primary activity) may be considered exceptional circumstances. A matrix approach has also been adopted in the policy which indicates that a non-alcohol lead premises may be given favourable consideration, but that a pub or night club would not be supported, subject to the special policy.

 

The application from Jungle Rumble (Brighton) Ltd is for an indoor golf centre and cafe bar with sale of alcohol and regulated entertainment from 10:00 to 02:00 hours every day. There are special circumstances in relation to the application in that a ‘shadow licence’ for the same unit 3 premises is in existence with licensable activities to 03:00 hours with comprehensive conditions attached.


Five representations in relation to the application were received from the Police, Licensing Authority and local residents. They expressed concerns about cumulative impact and negative impact upon the licensing objectives. The police and applicant have worked together and agreed a set of conditions and amendments to the original proposal. These have been sent to the parties just prior to the hearing as there was very recent agreement regarding provision of 2 door staff Fridays and Saturdays, and live music. Although these conditions mitigate risk, the police remain concerned about the late hours applied for in the context of this challenging location which is already saturated with licenced premises and suffers from high crime and disorder and anti-social behaviour. There are similar indoor golf premises at other locations within the UK but they mostly operate to earlier hours, the latest one being in Glasgow to 01:00 hours. They suggest further amendments may be appropriate and stress that the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that they would not add to negative cumulative impact. Similarly, the Licensing Authority acknowledge the engagement with the applicant but have concerns about cumulative impact and the hours applied for.

 

The local residents all live in Clarendon Mansions which is adjacent to the proposed premises. They all suffered from noise breakout and people noise from the licensed premises surrounding them which has a detrimental impact on their lives. They are very concerned about the application and the negative cumulative effect it may have as well as direct public nuisance and sound leakage from the premises due to poor sound proofing, and also bottle disposals. They have in the past had issues with noise from previous premises at this location. They ask that earlier hours are considered.

 

The applicants were represented by their solicitor Christopher Rees-Gay and in attendance also was the manager and proposed DPS Craig Darby. Mr Rees-Gay highlighted the style, and operation of the premises whose primary activity would be golf with ancillary bar facilities. 80% of customers would be pre-booked. Rather than relying on the shadow licence they were seeking a bespoke licence to reflect their proposed activity. He highlighted the conditions agreed with the police which reinforced the style of operation as an indoor golf centre. This was, he maintained ,not alcohol lead, contributed to a diversity of premises and as such along with meeting requirements of the police should constitute an exception to the policy. The applicants had a good track record and had not been reviewed or had any licence revoked.

 

The panel was able to ask questions about all aspects of the proposed operation as were the other parties. The exclusion of live music from the licence as well as shorter hours was canvassed in particular. Upon taking instructions the solicitor was able to agree removal of live music and an hour earlier closing during the week with last entry 30 minutes earlier and alcohol sales to cease 15 minutes earlier. They wished to keep 02:00 hours on Friday and Saturday as there would be demand then. A sound limiter was accepted as per the agreement with Environmental Protection. It was agreed that bottles would not be disposed of or collected between the hours of 21:00 and 08:00. Mr Darby stated that some sound proofing of walls and floors had taken place. He was happy for his contact details to be given to the residents.

 

The panel has considered this application on its individual merits. The panel is very mindful of the location of these premises within the CIZ and the policy considerations. The panel has heard the evidence from the police about the high levels of crime and disorder in the vicinity of the premises and the concerns about cumulative impact. It has heard the evidence from local residents about the impact of licensed premises on their lives already in this saturated area and the likely impact of this premises. The panel shares these concerns and believes they are compelling. However, the panel agrees that there that there are special circumstances in relation to this application. There is a later shadow licence in theory capable of being operated although it is likely a variation application would


be necessary. The panel also agree that the style and nature of the intended operation is different

and capable of being considered non-alcohol lead. The applicant and legal team have also worked well with the responsible authorities to agree a set of robust and tailored conditions which reinforce the style of operation of these premises and further concessions have been agreed at the hearing. The panel remain concerned about the late hours and the impact of those on the area and adjacent local residents especially noise of people entering and leaving the premises. Although some concession has been made by the applicant the panel does not consider it goes far enough to deal with the concerns raised or mitigate risk.

 

The panel therefore considers it is appropriate to grant the application but with the following timings: licensable activities (as agreed with the police and not including live music or off sales) and (opening) and closing times: Sunday to Thursday 10:00 hours to 00:00 (midnight); Friday and Saturday 10:00 hours to 01:00 hours. There shall be a last entry policy 30 minutes prior to cessation of licensable activities and closing time. The final version of the conditions agreed with the police will attach to the licence, as well as those not superseded from the operating schedule and the following conditions proposed and agreed during the hearing:

·               The premises licence holder will ensure that there will be no disposal or collection of bottles between the hours of 21:00 and 08:00.

·        The premises manager and DPS will ensure that local residents in Clarendon Mansions are provided with relevant up to date contact details.

·        A sound limiting device shall be installed at the premises and maintained in good working order at the level agreed upon with the relevant Council officers.

 

The panel considers that the application as amended and with all the conditions attached is not likely to add to negative cumulative impact and has some exceptional features.

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.               The applicant may appeal against the decision to impose conditions on the licence.

2.               A person who has made a relevant representation may appeal against the decision to grant the licence or against the decision to impose conditions.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

Wards affected: Regency;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle


30/01/2024 - Persia Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7384    For Determination

Appplication for a Variation of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 30/01/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

Licensing Panel hearing held on Tuesday 30th January 2024 virtually via Teams in respect of the application for a variation of the premises licence for Persia, 126 Church Road, Hove BN3 2EA.

 

The panel has read the report, relevant representations and further papers, and listened to the submissions put forward at the hearing. The panel has also considered the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and the statutory guidance.

 

The application is for a variation of the premises licence for Persia. The variation seeks extension of the licensed area to include an upstairs dining area as shown in the plan with the application.

 

The premises is situated within the Special Stress Area (SSA). This is an area of special concern to the licensing authority because of relatively high levels of crime, disorder and public nuisance.

 

Two representations were received from Sussex Police and local residents.

 

We heard from the Police representative who restated the Police concerns outlined in their representation which due to some of the content had to be heard in closed session. There were concerns about the lack of cooperation in providing CCTV after a serious incident within the premises. The police did not have confidence in the licence holder and although they were unable to provide more information in respect of one of their concerns invited the panel to refuse the application.

 

The residents were unable to attend the hearing but the panel has read their representation and supplementary questions and answers provided.

 

The applicant’s legal representative explained the nature of the application. The extension in area to include a further 25 to 30 covers was proposed due to excess demand. The premises were well run and in his view there was no evidence to suggest there would be negative impact on the licensing objectives if the application were granted. He urged the panel not to take account of the police submission regarding an investigation as no information was provided about this and thus no evidence to substantiate it. The previous drugs issue at the premises was resolved now. The CCTV


issue was ultimately resolved too and the incident mentioned was not the fault of the licence holder

and not that serious. In terms of the residents representation, an acoustic report had been submitted to show that noise would not escape from the premises or be an issue. It was acknowledged that this area was the hub of the late night economy in Hove but granting this application would not add to existing issues.

 

The panel was able to ask questions of the representative and the applicant and raised concerns about the language used to describe the incident linked to the CCTV request. Smokers would go outside the front of the building as currently. Conditions already on the licence would cover the new area. Planning issues were a separate consideration to licensing.

 

The panel has given careful consideration to this application. We can attach limited weight to the police concerns raised in their confidential representation due to their inability to provide more information. However the panel is concerned about the incident which occurred leading to the request for CCTV. This incident was dismissed by the representative on behalf of the applicant and the panel is concerned that such a dismissive attitude is not one consistent with the duty of the licence holder to uphold the licensing objectives of prevention of crime and disorder and public safety. The request from the police for the CCTV, which although eventually provided, was met with resistance and a lack of cooperation and the attitude of the licence holder to ensure this was provided in a timely fashion was not that of a responsible licence holder who should be concerned with public safety and the prevention of crime and disorder. The premises had a history of drugs issues and other breaches of conditions, which though largely resolved now still gave the panel cause for concern. Overall the panel consider that the applicant has shown a lack of regard for the importance of the licensing objectives and conditions as evidenced by the CCTV dealings and attitude towards the incident. Given these concerns and the evident police resistance, the panel cannot be confident that the licensing objectives would be promoted by granting this increase in the licensed area of the premises. In all the circumstances therefore, the panel considers that it is appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives to refuse the variation application.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

The applicant may appeal against the decision to refuse the variation.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrates’ Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of

notification of this decision letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal.

 

Wards affected: Central Hove;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Levente Nagy


20/02/2024 - Mazar Market Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7383    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 20/02/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 20/02/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held via Teams on Tuesday 20th February 2024 in respect of the application for a new premises licence in respect of premises known as Mazar Market, 56 Western Road, Brighton, BN1 2HA.

 

The panel has considered the report of the Executive Director of Neighbourhoods, Communities and Housing with the relevant representations made. It has listened carefully to all the points and submissions made. In reaching its decision, it has had due regard to the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and section 182 guidance.

 

The application is for a new premises licence, authorising the sale of alcohol off the premises every day, 08:00 to 23:00 hours. The application is within the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and therefore subject to the special policy on cumulative impact as set out in the Statement of Licensing Policy.

Our policy states that applications for new premises licences will be refused following relevant representations unless the applicant has demonstrated that their application will have no negative cumulative impact. The special policy will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances.

 

However, the policy is not absolute. Upon receipt of a relevant representation, the licensing authority will always consider the circumstances of each case and whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify departing from its special policy in the light of the individual circumstances of the case. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of an area, it may be granted. The impact can be expected to be different for premises with different styles and characteristics. A matrix approach has also been adopted in the policy which indicates that an off- licence in the CIZ would not be granted, subject to the special policy.

 

Representations were received from Sussex Police, and the Licensing Authority. The representations raised the licensing objectives of the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance, the protection of children from harm and cumulative impact.

 

The police are concerned about further increasing the availability of alcohol in an area already suffering from high levels of crime and disorder, and many existing licensed premises. They are concerned that an additional licence will add to negative cumulative impact. There is also the risk of


alcohol being consumed within open spaces close by increasing anti-social behaviour and proxy sales to children and those dependant on alcohol.

 

Both the police and licensing authority point to the lack of reference by the applicant to the SOLP and failure to address or acknowledge the location of the premises in the heart of the CIZ as the policy expects or show how their application will not add to the problems faced in the area. As guardians of the SOLP the licensing authority are thus concerned that the application is contrary to the policy and cannot identify any exceptional circumstances in relation to the application. The police invite the panel to consider refusing the application but attach a set of conditions that they contend may mitigate some risk if the panel were minded to grant the application.

 

The applicant’s agent addressed the panel. His client was willing to accept all the police conditions. He would also offer a condition whereby the premises staff received training from an external agency on an annual basis. He stressed that this was a shop selling alcohol among other groceries and so was not an off licence in the traditional sense. He pointed to the SOLP which stated that shops where the principal product sold was fresh produce may be considered more favourably. It was contended that this therefore should constitute an exception to the special policy and that the conditions agreed mitigated the risk.

 

During questions from the panel and others, it was established that the applicant did not have experience running a licensed premises but had general retail experience and was now a personal licence holder. The applicant would be willing to reduce the hours for sale of alcohol if that was a requirement from the panel. During the discussion a condition was also offered on behalf of the applicant to the effect that the alcohol sold would be ancillary to groceries excluding vapes and tobacco and that this would be evidenced by till receipts. This would mean that alcohol sales would not exceed the sale of groceries in any one transaction.

 

The panel has carefully considered this application on its merits and in light of the concerns raised by the Responsible Authorities and submissions on behalf of the applicant. The panel is very mindful of the location of these premises in the centre of the CIZ and that the police have provided evidence of high levels of crime and disorder in the area and a relatively high number of existing off licences close by.

 

The applicant made no reference to the location of the premises in their application. The panel can see nothing exceptional about the business as it is similar to many other premises close by who sell groceries alongside alcohol. It has given consideration to the condition offered by the applicant whereby alcohol is ancillary to other groceries but considers that such a condition would be difficult to manage in practice and could lead to friction. The lack of experience of the applicant in managing licensed premises was also a concern given the location of these premises within such a challenging area and the complex and detailed nature of the conditions accepted and proposed. It was not considered that reducing the hours for sale of alcohol would mitigate the risk as challenges such as proxy sales, street drinking and anti-social behaviour existing during the day too.

 

Overall, the panel are concerned that this would be another premises selling alcohol for consumption off the premises and sharing the concerns of the police and licensing authority consider it is likely to add to the cumulative impact of problems already in the area and thus undermine the licensing objectives. As already stated, the panel does not consider that exceptional circumstances have been shown in this case. The application is therefore refused.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5, paragraph 1 of the Licensing Act 2003)


The applicant may appeal against the decision to refuse the licence.

All appeals must be made to Magistrates’ Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed

delivery of this letter. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day

after posting. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal

 

Wards affected: Regency;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle, Levente Nagy


28/01/2025 - Standards Update - Annual Review ref: 7382    For Determination

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 28/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards and General Purposes Committee note the report.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Victoria Simpson


28/01/2025 - Internal Audit and Counter Fraud Quarter 2 Progress Report 2024-25 ref: 7379    For Determination

The purpose of this report is to provide Members with an update on all Internal Audit and Counter Fraud activity completed during quarter 2 (2024-25), including a summary of all key audit findings. The report also includes an update on the performance of the Internal Audit service during the period.

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 28/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards and General Purposes Committee note the report.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Carolyn Sheehan


28/01/2025 - Annual Surveillance Report 2024 ref: 7378    For Determination

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 28/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards and General Purposes Commitee:

 

1)       Approves the continued use of covert surveillance as an enforcement tool to prevent and detect crime and disorder investigated by its officers, providing the activity is in line with the Council’s Policy and Guidance and the necessity and proportionality rules are stringently applied.

 

2)       Notes the surveillance activity undertaken by the authority since the report to Committee in January 2024 as set out in paragraph 3.3 in the report.

 

3)       Approves the continued use of the Policy and Guidance document as set out in Appendix 1 in its updated form.

 

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Jim Whitelegg


28/01/2025 - Code of Corporate Governance and Risk Management Framework ref: 7381    For Determination

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 28/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards and General Purposes Committee:

 

1)       Approve the updated Code of Corporate Governance as included in appendix 1.

 

2)       Note the current Risk Management Framework as included in appendix 2. Any feedback from the committee will be taken into account when refreshing the Risk Management Framework for approval by Cabinet.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Rima Desai, Jenny Garlick, Luke Hamblin


30/01/2025 - Changes to Contract Standing Orders ref: 7392    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 30/01/2025 - Council

Decision published: 04/02/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

1)     That the report, recommendations and Minutes Extract of the Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee held on 28 January 2025 be noted.

 

2)     That full Council approved the proposed new Contract Standing Orders at Annex 1 with effect from 24th February 2025.

 

3)     That full Council delegated authority to the Council’s Monitoring Officer to amend the council’s Constitution to incorporate the proposed Contract Standing Orders when the new Procurement Act 2023 comes into effect, and to make amendments to Appendix 1 of the new Contract Standing Orders as legislative, technical or organisational changes require.

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 30/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee:

 

1)       Note the proposed changes to Contract Standing Orders.

 

2)       Recommends the updated Contract Standing Orders at Annex 1 to full Council for approval.

Wards affected: (All Wards);


28/01/2025 - External Auditor's Annual Report 2023-24 ref: 7377    For Determination

The External Auditor will report on their review of the council's arrangements to make the best use of its resources as well as reviewing the council's financial position and the effectiveness of its governance arrangements.

Decision Maker: Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Audit, Standards & General Purposes Committee

Decision published: 29/01/2025

Effective from: 28/01/2025

Decision:

RESOLVED –

 

That the Audit, Standards and General Purposes Committee note the Auditor’s Annual Report (Value For Money) for the financial year ending 31 March 2024.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Nigel Manvell, Jane Strudwick


04/02/2025 - Personal Budgets and Direct Payments Policy for children and young people aged 0-25 with special educational needs and disabilities ref: 7376    For Determination

The personal budget and direct payment policy fulfils the council’s duty to offer personal budgets and direct payments to parents, carers and young people and links specifically to the council plan priorities 2 and 3 and also with 5 priority areas of the SEND strategy to allow increased choice and control of service provision for families.

Decision Maker: Cabinet Member for Children, Families, Youth Services and for Ending Violence against Women and Girls

Decision published: 27/01/2025

Effective from: 04/02/2025

Decision:

Consideration was given to a report of the Cabinet Member for Children, Families, Youth Services and for Ending Violence against Women and Girls

 

DECISION -

 

The Cabinet Member for Children, Families, Youth Services and for Ending Violence against Women and Girls is asked to:

 

Agree that the policy can be ratified and used by all relevant council teams.

 

Note that our strategic partners for working with families (Amaze and PaCC) have been consulted throughout the policy development. PaCC are facilitating further work with parents and our young people are being consulted about a young person’s guide to personal budgets and direct payments.

 

Note that our staff teams have been introduced to the new policy and have developed working processes within the service teams to deliver to it. Processes have been piloted over the autumn term 2024.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Yvonne Ely


23/01/2025 - Brighton i360 - Decision on Future (Exempt Category 3) ref: 7375    Recommendations Approved

This report updates Cabinet on the decision of the board of Brighton i360 Limited to file for administration, the work done by the administrators to seek a sale of Brighton i360’s business and assets to new owners through an administration process. It is recommended the council agree to the release of its security on the debt owed to the council by Brighton i360.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 23/01/2025

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Max Woodford


23/01/2025 - Brighton i360 - Decision on Future ref: 7372    Recommendations Approved

This report updates Cabinet on the decision of the board of Brighton i360 Limited to file for administration, the work done by the administrators to seek a sale of Brighton i360’s business and assets to new owners through an administration process. It is recommended the council agree to the release of its security on the debt owed to the council by Brighton i360.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 23/01/2025

Decision:

1)           Cabinet agrees to release the security on its £51m loan debt and rolled-up interest to the Buyer. In return, the city council will receive a future share of revenue, as set out in the Part 2 report.

 

2)           Cabinet delegates authority to the Corporate Director for Operations, following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance and City Regeneration, to complete negotiations and any legal documentation required to give effect to recommendation 2.1 above.

 

3)           Cabinet agrees to commission an external independent investigation to understand the circumstances of and lessons from the council’s original decision to loan public money to deliver the Brighton i360.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Max Woodford


23/01/2025 - Park & Ride (Exempt Category 3) ref: 7374    Recommendations Approved

Part 2 report accompanying main Park & Ride report.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Laura Wells


23/01/2025 - Moulsecoomb Hub and Housing project (Exempt Category 3) ref: 7373    Recommendations Approved

This is a Part 2 report covering the confidential, financial aspects of the Moulsecoomb Hub and Housing project report, going to Cabinet in January

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Wards affected: Moulsecoomb & Bevendean;

Lead officer: Stephen Marsden


23/01/2025 - Regional care cooperative DfE pathfinder ref: 7368    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval by Cabinet for the Council to continue to be involved in a South East regional care cooperative pilot, funded by the Department of Education. This initiative will support the council to provide appropriate placements for children in care.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)           Cabinet agrees for Brighton & Hove City Council to continue to be involved in the RCC.

 

2)           Cabinet agrees for a contribution of £250,000 to be made from to the RCC, with £50,000 being made in 25/26; £100,000 in 26/27 and £100,000 in 27/28.  An outline business case has been completed as part of the corporate budget setting process for 2025/26 to access modernisation funding for this purpose.

 

3)           Cabinet delegates authority to the Corporate Director, Families, Children & Wellbeing in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Children, Families, Youth Services and for Ending Violence Against Women and Girls to agree the RCC delivery model.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Deb Austin


23/01/2025 - Park and Ride ref: 7365    Recommendations Approved

This report is to consider the feasibility of potential locations to deliver Park and Ride for the city.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Andrew Renaut


23/01/2025 - Moulsecoomb Hub and Housing project ref: 7364    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval on next steps and budget for the Moulsecoomb Hub and Housing project, following the receipt of tenders.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

That Cabinet

 

1)           agrees a full construction budget for the Moulsecoomb Housing project, as set out in the Part 2 Report

 

2)           delegates authority to the Interim Corporate Director- City Operations to enter into relevant contracts for the construction of the Moulsecoomb Hub and Housing Project, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing & New Homes

 

3)           in the event of a successful application for funding, delegates authority to the Interim Corporate Director- City Operations to enter into a Grant Funding Agreement for Brownfield Infrastructure and Land (BIL) fund

 

4)           delegates authority to the Interim Corporate Director- City Operations to enter into any Contracts required to access Homes England Grant Funding for the residential development

Wards affected: Moulsecoomb & Bevendean;

Lead officer: Stephen Marsden


23/01/2025 - Council Tax Base and Business Rates Retention forecasts 2025/26 ref: 7367    Recommendations Approved

This report is to agree the statutory Council Tax tax base and Business Rates (NNDR) tax base for 2025-26 which will be used as the basis of estimating taxation revenues and setting the Brighton & Hove City Council element of the Band D Council Tax for the Brighton and Hove area. Also, to agree any changes to the Council Tax Reduction Scheme.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)           That Cabinet agrees the calculation of the council’s tax base for the year 2025/26.

 

2)           That Cabinet notes the collection rate assumed is 98.75%.

 

3)           That Cabinet notes that no change to the Council Tax Reduction scheme is proposed for 2025/26 except that, in accordance with the policy agreed by full Council on 3 February 2022, earnings bands will be uplifted to reflect government changes to the National Living Wage as set out in paragraph 3.7.

 

4)           That Cabinet agreesthat in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012, the amounts calculated by Brighton & Hove City Council as its council tax base for the year 2025/26 shall be as follows:-

 

2.3.1    Brighton and Hove in whole – 95,160.3 (detail in appendix 1).

2.3.2    Royal Crescent Enclosure Committee – 29.5 (detail in appendix 2).

2.3.3    Hanover Crescent Enclosure Committee – 39.9 (detail in appendix 2).

2.3.4    Marine Square Enclosure Committee – 72.2 (detail in appendix 2).

2.3.5    Parish of Rottingdean – 1,785.8 (detail in appendix 2).

 

5)           That Cabinet agrees that for the purposes of Section 35(1) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, the expenses of meeting the special levies issued to the council by the Enclosure Committees shall be its special expenses.

 

6)           That Cabinet agrees that the Enclosure Committees and Rottingdean Parish are paid the required Council Tax Reduction Grant of c£4,000 in total, to ensure they are no better or no worse off because of the introduction of the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for the reasons set out in paragraph 3.14.

 

7)           That Cabinet notes that the amount forecast to be received by the council in 2025/26 from its share of local business rates and section 31 Local Government Act 2003 compensation grants is £86.520m, based on the latest available data.

 

8)           That Cabinet notes that the amount forecast to be received by the council in 2025/26 from its share of local Council Tax, including Adult Social Care precepts, is £197.623m based on latest available data.

 

9)           That Cabinet delegates the agreement of the final business rates forecast and completion of the NNDR1 2025/26 form to the Section 151 Chief Financial Officer following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance & City Regeneration and this will be reflected in the General Fund Budget report to Cabinet in February 2025

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Nigel Manvell


23/01/2025 - Preventing and Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls and Domestic and Sexual Abuse Strategy 2025-2028 ref: 7369    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval of the Preventing and Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls and Domestic and Sexual Abuse Strategy 2025-2028

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)           Cabinet approves the Preventing and Tackling Violence against Women and Girls, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence strategy 2025-2028 in appendix 1.

 

2)           Cabinet agrees the implementation of the 3 year delivery plan set out in appendix 2.

 

3)           Cabinet agrees to the setting up of a new VAWG/DA/SV Oversight Board to report into the Community Safety Partnership to ensure effective implementation, accountability and alignment with strategic objectives.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Anne Clark


23/01/2025 - Microsoft licence renewal ref: 7366    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval for the procurement process of renewing Microsoft licence agreement and provide delegated authority to Chief Finance Officer to award.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)            Cabinet delegates authority to the Interim Corporate Director, City Operations to take all necessary steps to use the NHS Digital Workplace Solutions Framework to procure a Licence Solution Partner (LSP) for the Council.

 

2)            Cabinet delegates authority to the Interim Corporate Director, City Operations to Award a contract to the successful Licence Solution Partner (LSP) to provide the Council with three Microsoft Enterprise Licence Agreements for a term of 3 years with an estimated total value of up to £4,000,000.00

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Dan Snowdon


23/01/2025 - Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund ref: 7371    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval to delegate authority to the Corporate Director for Housing, Care & Wellbeing to award a contract for the delivery of works and project support linked to the Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund. Dependent on confirmation of a successful bid for funding, to be communicated early 2025

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)           That Cabinet delegates authority to the Corporate Director for Homes and Adult Social Care, in consultation with the Cabinet member for Housing and New Homes and the Cabinet member for Net Zero and Environmental Services, to enter into the Grant Agreement with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero for the Warm Homes; Social Housing Fund Wave 3.

 

2)           That, subject to Warm Homes: Social Housing grant funding being agreed, Cabinet delegates authority to the Corporate Director for Homes and Adult Social Care, in consultation with the Cabinet member for Housing and New Homes, to award a contract, following ‘negotiation without reopening competition to Suppliers’, to E.ON Energy Solutions to deliver the works summarised in this report with a value up to £2.4 million from April 2025 to September 2028.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Miles Davidson


23/01/2025 - Admission of new member to the Greater Brighton Economic Board ref: 7363    Recommendations Approved

This report recommends the ratification of changes to the Heads of Terms for the Greater Brighton Economic Board, triggered by the decision to invite the NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board to join the Greater Brighton Economic Board.

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 23/01/2025

Decision:

1)           Cabinet agrees that NHS Sussex ICB joins the Greater Brighton Economic Board as a member of the Business Partnership.

 

2)           Cabinet notes that these changes to the membership and Heads of Terms are dependent on the decision of all the local authorities represented on the Board agreeing that the new member be appointed.

 

3)           Cabinet agrees to amend the Board’s Heads of Terms and instructs the Monitoring Officer to amend the Council’s constitution to reflect these amendments once they have been formally approved by all the constituent authorities.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Andy Hill


23/01/2025 - Brighton and Hove Food Strategy Action Plan 2025-30 ref: 7362    Recommendations Approved

This report sets out recommendations from the refreshed Food Strategy Action Plan 2025-2030

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 23/01/2025

Decision:

1)            That Cabinet agrees to endorse the city’s Food Strategy Action Plan 2025-30 (Appendix 1) and to be one of the partners involved in delivery and evaluation.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Angela Blair, Peter Sharp, Max Woodford


23/01/2025 - Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit Version 5 ref: 7370    Recommendations Approved

This reports seeks cabinet approval of the revised Trans Inclusion Toolkit for use by schools and colleges in the city

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - Cabinet

Decision published: 24/01/2025

Effective from: 01/02/2025

Decision:

1)            Cabinet agrees to publish the Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit Version 5 (appendix 1) subject to the amendment belowand recommends all education settings in Brighton & Hove use its guidance to inform policy and practice.

 

2.7.9   Statutory Guidance, Relationships Sex and Health Education recommends that all children and young people have access to information about puberty:  

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Ashley Seymour-Williams


15/11/2024 - Station Grill Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7361    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Application under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 15/11/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 15/11/2024

Decision:

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Friday 15th November 2024 in respect of the application for a premises licence in respect of premises known as Station Grill, 62 Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XD

 

The Panel has read all the papers including the report, relevant representations and documents submitted by the applicant and has listened to all the submissions made today. The panel has had regard to the Statutory Guidance and the Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

This is an application for a new premises licence within the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and therefore subject to the special policy on cumulative impact as set out in the Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

Our policy states that applications for new premises licences will be refused following relevant representations unless the applicant has demonstrated that their application will have no negative cumulative impact. The special policy will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. The policy applies to all new premises licences for example pubs, restaurants and take-away establishments.

 

However, the policy is not absolute. Upon receipt of a relevant representation, the licensing authority will always consider the circumstances of each case and whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify departing from its special policy in the light of the individual circumstances of the case. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of an area, it may be granted. The impact can be expected to be different for premises with different styles and characteristics.


The application is for a restaurant and burger shop with late night refreshment from Sunday to Thursday 23:00 to 02:00 and Friday to Saturday 23:00 to 03:00. After midnight it is proposed that the operation will be for collection and delivery only with no eating on the premises.

 

Two representations were received from Sussex Police and the Licensing authority. The representations had concerns regarding the prevention of crime and disorder, public nuisance and cumulative impact. The police had concerns about the location of these premises which was a busy road and main thoroughfare from the station to the city centre with a high number of incidents of crime and disorder. Offering food for takeaway for the hours applied for was likely to lead to an increase in incidents and hinder dispersal. Having considered the documentation submitted by the applicant the police were further concerned that he did not understand the policy concerns or appreciate the challenges involved in this area or in the late-night economy in general. Although recommending refusal the police had put forward a set of conditions to mitigate some risk. There was some confusion as to which conditions the applicant had agreed to but the condition to operate as delivery only after midnight and thus not allow customers for takeaways was rejected by the applicant as he wanted customers to be able to collect food from the premises. The licensing authority was also concerned about the application in policy terms and while acknowledging the effort the applicant had made had concerns about his understanding and lack of direct experience of the late-night economy.

 

The applicant had submitted detailed documentation seeking to address the concerns raised by the responsible authorities and the policy implications. Emphasis was placed on the fact this premises did not sell alcohol and that crime was mainly associated with premises selling alcohol and his was a small restaurant with no alcohol. He believed the need for his premises was relevant and that he had demonstrated that with the measures he proposed there would be no associated crime and disorder and that it was exceptional. Other similar licences had been granted and already existed in the area. He would only be open for collection and delivery after midnight. He was willing to agree to appropriate security measures but would not attract high numbers of people.

 

The panel has carefully considered this application on its merits and is mindful of the location of the premises in Queens Road within the CIZ which experiences high levels of crime and disorder and is a key late-night thoroughfare.

 

The panel and other parties were able to question the applicant about his intended operation and the measures proposed. In response to questions, it was not clear how the collection aspect would work or how customers would place orders. The applicant mentioned a potential window hatch or awning outside the shop and that taxis could order online and wait in the loading bays. He could not be responsible for congregation generally on the street only within his premises and within his control. He was willing to have an SIA door staff on duty. The police asked about the relevance of challenge 25 which he had proposed in the context of late-night refreshment, and it was clear by the response that there was a lack of understanding of the measure. The licensing authority asked about his relevant experience, and it was established that he had experience of running premises outside the UK but no relevant local experience. The applicant placed much emphasis on other similar premises which had been granted licences most of which pre-dated the cumulative impact policy. However, although it may seem unfair, the panel cannot take previously granted licences into account, it must focus on the merits of this application. The panel considered that the applicant did not appreciate or properly understand some of the conditions he was agreeing to which was illustrated in his written submission and in


response to questioning especially on the issue of SIA security. The panel is also concerned that the applicant does not have a proper understanding of the nature of cumulative impact in our policy which is about the negative cumulative effect of a concentration of licensed premises in an area which leads to problems of crime and disorder and public nuisance over and above those linked to an individual premises. He also misunderstood the concept of ‘need’ which is not a relevant licensing concern.

Overall, the panel shares the concerns of the police and licensing authority and does not have confidence in the ability of the applicant to operate such a licence without issue in this challenging area. While appreciating the efforts made by the applicant in his application there was a demonstrable lack of understanding of the licensing regime, and policy as it applied to this application. There are no exceptional circumstances shown and the panel believes granting the application is likely to add to problems of cumulative impact and undermine the licensing objectives. The panel is therefore refusing this application.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Your Council’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.   The applicant may appeal against the decision to refuse the licence.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. Delivery will be deemed to have been affected on the second

working day after posting.

 

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle, Levente Nagy


15/05/2024 - Wine Barrel Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7360    For Determination

Application for a Variation of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 15/05/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 15/05/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

 

Licensing panel hearing held on Wednesday 15th May 2024 virtually via Teams in respect of the application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of premises known as Wine Barrel, 122 – 123 Western Road, Hove, BN3 1DB.

 

The Panel has considered all the papers and relevant representations and listened to the submissions made today.

 

The application is situated within the cumulative impact zone (CIZ). Our policy states that applications for variations which are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will be refused following relevant representations. This presumption can be rebutted by the applicant if they can show that their application will have no negative cumulative impact.

 

This special policy can only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. However, the policy is not absolute. The panel must consider the individual circumstances and merits of the application. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of the area, it may be granted.

 

The application seeks to add on sales of alcohol to allow the premises to cater for wine tasting and similar events to permit customers to sample wines before purchase. There is an outside table and chairs area proposed which is part of their premises.

 

Representations were made by Sussex Police and the Licensing Authority. Since submitting the application, the applicants have liaised with the police and agreed a set of conditions which have been submitted to the panel. These include sale of alcohol on the premises to cease at 21.30 hours, no spirits and waiter/waitress service with no vertical drinking.

 

The police and licensing authority still had concerns especially about the addition of on sales and the outside area. It was clarified that opening hours (to take account of off-sales) would be from 10.00 to 23.00 hours everyday. This was a challenging area with street drinking and anti-social behaviour and any additional premises could add to problems in the area and be vulnerable to risk

itself.

 

The applicant’s agent and applicant himself explained the reasons for the application and the way in which the premises would operate and its style and characteristics. It was a high-end wine merchant selling specialist local wines and craft beer. The aim was to enhance the off sales element by events

 

The applicant was a highly qualified wine specialist. The premises was genuinely different and added welcome diversity to the area. The outside area would be carefully managed, glasses cleared quickly and no bottles on the tables. There would be complimentary charcuterie and an arrangement with a neighbouring restaurant to provide more substantial food. A risk assessment requirement would identify occasions when security may be necessary. They had held a series of successful Temporary Event Notices (TENs) without

incident. The outside area would be cordoned off.

 

The panel has considered the application on its merits within the context of our special policy and the Matrix. The conditions agreed between the parties are very robust and encapsulate the style and operation of the premises. It is a specialist premises whose offer is largely unique and not akin to a bar. They have held successful trial runs with the TENs. The panel consider that this style of operation with all the conditions attached is not likely to add to negative cumulative impact in the area and as such can be an exception to the policy. It also has confidence that the premises will be well managed. The panel does have concerns about the outside area and consider that it is appropriate the area should be separated off from the highway by appropriate means as the

applicants suggested.

 

The following condition is therefore attached:

The outside seating area shall be cordoned off in an appropriate manner to prevent people from wandering in from the highway and to protect customers.

It was noted that the applicants would agree to joining the Brighton Crime Reduction Partnership (BCRP) and this is welcomed but the panel leave it to the applicants to make a final decision regarding this.

 

The application is therefore granted to include all the conditions agreed in the addendum document marked ‘final conditions for Wine Barrel’ with the additional condition as above for the outside area. It is confirmed also that the  opening hours of the premises will be from 10.00 to 23.00 every day.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s web-site under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

1. The applicant may appeal against the decision to modify/impose conditions.

2. A person who has made a relevant representation may appeal against the grant of the

variation or any condition attached.

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed

delivery of this letter. A fee is payable on the lodging of an appeal.

Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

Wards affected: Brunswick & Adelaide;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Corinne Hardcastle, Levente Nagy


06/06/2024 - Chicks Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7359    For Determination

Application for a Variation of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 06/06/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 06/06/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of

Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Thursday 6th June 2024 in respect of the application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of premises known as Chicks, 5 Lewes Road, Brighton BN2 3HP.

 

The panel has read all the papers and has considered the written representations and all submissions made at the hearing. The panel has also had regard to its Statement of Licensing Policy (SoLP) and the statutory guidance.

 

The application is within the Special Stress Area (SSA) as defined in the Statement of Licensing Policy which is an area of concern to the licensing authority because of the relatively high levels of crime and disorder and nuisance experienced with in it.

 

The application is to extend the hours for the provision of late-night refreshment both for collection and delivery to 05:00 hours Monday to Saturday and to 03:00 hours on Sunday.

Relevant representations were received from Sussex Police, and the Licensing Authority. The concerns raised related to the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance and cumulative impact. A joint licensing inspection was conducted at the premises on the 20th April 2024. A number of breaches of conditions were identified and as a result both responsible authorities recommend refusing this application as the applicant has not demonstrated an ability to adhere to the current licence or work constructively with the responsible authorities. It is also maintained that there are no policy grounds for granting a further extension in this challenging area and no exceptional circumstances shown.

 

The applicant’s representative presented their case and the following is a summary of the main

points made:

 

·       In terms of the alleged breaches of conditions, he did subsequently send CCTV details to licensing. He and the owner lived close by and could have been called on to assist. The seating was a minor breach just on that night and had not happened since.

·       Regarding the delivery vehicles using the front of the premises in breach of the condition, and contrary to the red route, since it was brought to his attention they have developed a robust policy which has been sent to the main companies and will be adhered to. If the staff

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Premises Licence Holder or Applicant

 

Those who have made relevant representations

Date: Our Ref: Phone:

13th June 2024 2024/01244/LAPREV

01273 294429

 

e-mail: ehl.licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk


don’t know the conditions as alleged they could contact the manager who is close by. It was

refuted that they were operating beyond their hours at 01.15 on 21st April.

·       The application would promote the licensing objectives and the premises was an integral part of the Lewes Road. They would have security on call. The fact the premises was open would deter crimes from taking place. They were no incidents relating to the premises. They provided affordable meals for students. They would work with the police and would be willing to accept reduced hours to 0300 during the week and 0400 Friday and Saturday.

 

The panel has considered this application on its merits and is mindful of the location of the premises within the SSA and the need to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to depart from the policy. The licence was granted just over a year ago and conditions were attached by the panel. The applicant committed to working with the responsible authorities. The panel is therefore disappointed that breaches of conditions were discovered during the licensing visit in April this year. The fact that staff were unaware of the conditions on the licence was a concern and itself a breach of one of the conditions where staff should be trained. The panel has listened carefully to the submissions of the applicant but ultimately does not consider it is appropriate to grant this variation which would be a considerable extension of hours in a challenging location. The panel does not have sufficient confidence that the applicants will manage such a licence given the failure to adhere to the current conditions on the licence recently granted. The panel shares the concerns of the responsible authorities in this respect. Furthermore, the panel does not consider that exceptional circumstances have been shown to override the policy in this case at this challenging location. The variation application is therefore refused.

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.   The applicant may appeal against the decision to refuse the application.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed

delivery of this letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal. Delivery will be deemed to have

been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

Wards affected: Round Hill;

Lead officer: Levente Nagy


21/10/2024 - Tesco Express Licensing Panel Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7358    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 21/10/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 21/10/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of

Panel.

Licensing Panel hearing held on Monday 21 October 2024 virtually in respect of the

application for a new premises licence for Tesco Express, 194 Western Road, Brighton, BN1 2BA

 

The panel has read all the papers including the report and relevant representations and listened to the submissions put forward at the hearing. The panel has also had regard to the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and the section 182 Licensing Act 2003 statutory guidance.

 

The application is for a new premises licence authorising the sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises between 08.00 and 22.00 hours every day.

 

The premises are situated within the Cumulative Impact Area (CIA). This is an area where the council has determined that the concentration of licensed premises in an area of the city centre is causing problems of crime and disorder and public nuisance, and that an approach to “Cumulative Impact” is necessary as part of its SOLP. That approach provides that applications for new licences in the CIA which are likely to add to the existing Cumulative Impact will be refused following

relevant representations. The presumption of refusal can be rebutted if the applicant can show that their application will have no negative Cumulative Impact.

 

A “matrix” approach to licensing decisions has been adopted by the council in its SOLP. It sets out a framework of what the licensing authority would like to see within its area and gives an indication of the likelihood of success to any applicant. The matrix suggests that no off-licences will be permitted in the CIA.

 

One representation was received from the Licensing Authority setting out concerns relating to the Prevention of Crime and Disorder, the Prevention of Public Nuisance and Cumulative Impact.

 

At the hearing, the Licensing Authority representative restated their policy objection to the application.

 

We heard from the applicant’s legal representative and Licensing Manager. In their presentation, and in answer to our questions we were told that:


·       Tescos are responsible retailers and had pioneered a number of alcohol licensing best practice measures.

·       Within the Brighton area, Tescos liaise closely with the Police. The applicant had worked closely with them to identify a suitable location for the new retail outlet and had agreed conditions, which are set out on pages 31 to 33 of the agenda.

·       The conditions are not standard. They are designed to address problems associated with the CIA. The special conditions include alcohol behind a screen, staff training every 12 weeks and a door supervisor on duty throughout the store’s opening hours, which are longer than the hours for the sale of alcohol.

·       The applicant company understands the CIA. It already operates 3 stores within it. They do not cause problems. The new store manager has worked at two of them.

·       Alcohol is a small but important part of the Tesco offer. Typically. 95% of alcohol sales are linked to sales of other goods.

·       The store will have additional security measures in place – at least 2 body-worn video cameras on the security guard and team leader: the ability to close the door and admit customers one by one; a button to summon support.

The panel has considered this application on its merits. We note the policy objection to the application based on both the CIA and Matrix, but we are particularly struck by the absence of an objection to the application by the Police. In our experience, that is unusual. We rely on the Police to be the council’s main source of advice on matters relating to the promotion of the crime and disorder licensing objective. Their lack of objection together with agreement of unusually onerous conditions leads us to conclude that they do not anticipate that this application will add to the problems of cumulative impact in the area.

 

We have also noted the applicant’s close liaison with the Police, and the agreement of conditions. Our CIA policy allows a departure from the policy in “exceptional circumstances”. These include consultation with and meeting requirements of responsible authorities. In this case, the applicant has satisfied the exceptional circumstances definition, allowing a departure from policy. In summary, we do not believe that the application will add to the issues associated with cumulative impact.

 

The application is therefore granted with the conditions agreed with the Police, as set out on pages 31-33 of the agenda.

 

The Panel believes that the above conditions are appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’. A webcast of the meeting is also available.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

The applicant may appeal against the decision to impose conditions on the licence.

 

Any person who made a relevant representation who desires to contend that the licence ought not to have been granted, or that on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought to have imposed different or additional conditions, may appeal against the decision.


All appeals must be made to Magistrates’ Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of

notification of this decision letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal.

 

 

 

 

Wards affected: Regency;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Levente Nagy


21/10/2024 - KFC Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7357    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 21/10/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 21/10/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of

Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Monday 21st October 2024 in respect of the application for a premises licence in respect of premises known as KFC, 22 – 23 London Road, Brighton BN1 4JB.

 

The panel has read all the papers and has considered the written representations and further documents submitted by the applicant and all submissions made at the hearing. The panel has also had regard to its Statement of Licensing Policy (SoLP) and the statutory guidance.

 

The application is within the Special Stress Area (SSA) as defined in the Statement of Licensing Policy which is an area of concern to the licensing authority because of the relatively high levels of crime and disorder and nuisance experienced with in it.

 

The application is for the provision of late-night refreshment for eating in, collection and delivery from 23:00 hours to 03:00 hours every day.

 

Relevant representations were received from Sussex Police, the Licensing Authority and ward Councillor. The concerns raised related to the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance.

The police concerns focus on the location of the premises in the SSA with London Road having a relatively high number of incidents of crime and disorder. Although the road was relatively quiet at night there were still call outs. They contend that granting the late licence will attract a higher footfall and is likely to lead to an increase in incidents into the night thus having a negative impact and requiring police intervention and resources. The police questioned the validity and relevance of the expert report obtained on behalf of the applicants on the basis that it was based on a single visit and did not demonstrate local knowledge and a number of assertions about the policing of the area were false. There were relatively few late-night refreshment premises in the area which opened after midnight. A set of conditions had been put forward and agreed with the applicant, but the police asked that the application be refused as conditions would not fully mitigate the risk of granting.

 

The ward Councillor expressed concern on behalf of local residents about the delivery vehicles late at night and said that later hours would have a detrimental effect in this respect. The Licensing


Authority set out the policy concerns and the risk that granting later hours may add to burdens

within the SSA.

On behalf of the applicant submissions were made about their many years' experience and the set

of robust conditions that now were included in the operating schedule. They had met with the parties to allay concerns. Several of the conditions were highlighted including SIA door staff, the Staff safe system and condition 13 regarding delivery vehicles. These conditions were, it was submitted, exceptional. The expert report considered that the area was not a risk in terms of crime and disorder. There was no real evidence that granting this application would have a negative impact and the representations were largely policy driven.

 

The panel has considered this application carefully on its merits and is mindful of the location of the premises within the SSA. Earlier closing hours were canvassed but the applicants believed they had a good case for opening later and wished that to stand. On balance the panel considers that a later operation for take away and delivery to 03:00 hours would not undermine the licensing objectives. The evidence pointed to daytime rather than later night issues in the area. The applicant’s track record was good, and the measures and conditions agreed with the applicants were robust and would promote the licensing objectives. The panel was however concerned that eating in the premises after midnight could lead to issues of anti-social behaviour, public nuisance, and possible crime and disorder in terms of people congregating in groups and not dispersing, and that the premises should thus not operate after 00:30 for dining in. A condition should therefore be applied as follows: After 00:30 hours every day (to close of business at 03:00), the premises shall not permit customers to dine on the premises and will only be open for takeaways and deliveries.

The panel attaches all the conditions agreed with the police and those from the operating schedule and considers that all the conditions attached will mitigate risk and promote the licensing objectives.

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

·       The applicant may appeal against the decision to impose and modify conditions.

·       A person who has made a relevant representation may appeal against grant of the licence and decision to impose conditions.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

 

Wards affected: West Hill & North Laine;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Levente Nagy


30/05/2024 - Hove Fitness Club Liccensing Panel Report (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7356    For Determination

Application for a New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 30/05/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 30/05/2024

Decision:

 

 Licensing Act 2003 – Licensing Panel Hearing Notification of the Determination of Panel. Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Thursday 30th May 2024 in respect of the application for a new premises licence for Hove Fitness Club, 2 St Heliers Avenue, Hove, BN3 5RE

The panel has read all the papers including the report and relevant representations and listened to the submissions put forward at the hearing. The panel has also had regard to the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and the section 182 Licensing Act 2003 statutory guidance.

The application is for a new premises licence, authorising the sale of alcohol by for consumption on the premises between 12.00 and 22.00 every day.

The premises are not situated within the Cumulative Impact Area (CIA) or the Special Stress Area (SSA). Zone (CIZ). Subject to any issues raised by the Matrix, the application falls to be determined on its own merits.

A “matrix” approach to licensing decisions has been adopted by the council in its SOLP. It sets out a framework of what the licensing authority would like to see within its area and gives an indication of the likelihood of success to any applicant. The matrix provides for a terminal hour of 10pm for cafes in “Other areas”.

In her introduction, the Licensing Officer advised that no licence was required for recorded music between the hours of 08.00 and 23.00 hours on premises licensed for the sale of alcohol.

Two representations were received from local residents setting out concerns relating to the Prevention of Public Nuisance Protection of Children from Harm. One of the objectors appeared at the hearing to expand upon their concerns.

We also heard from the applicant company’s representatives.

In their presentation, and in answer to questions we were told that:

• The applicant had run a successful sports club, with a bar, in Orchard Road for many years without problems.

• There had been prior consultation with the Police, which had led to the comprehensive conditions being submitted. (pages 22 -24 of the agenda)

• The application for the sale of alcohol was an attempt to maximise revenue.

• Access to the club was limited to club members with a QR code. To exit the premises, members have to pass the manned reception desk.

• Recorded music was already played inside the premises. There are no plans to put speakers on the

balcony.

• Occasionally special events are held, such as a quiz. The last quiz was ticketed to control numbers.

• The café has a seating capacity of approximately 50, and the external balcony about 20.

• The premises are to be closed to members by 10pm. A condition prohibiting alcohol sales after 21.45 would be acceptable.

• With approximately 50 parking spaces, parking is not expected to be an issue.

• The company would be willing to erect signs reminding club members and their guests to be quiet when leaving the premises and to be respectful to neighbours.

The panel has considered this application on its merits. It welcomes the applicant’s active engagement with the Police, and the agreed conditions. Access and egress to the premises is closely controlled, so the sale of alcohol to members of the public with no connection to the club premises is almost impossible. The seating capacity in the café and balcony is not large. The proposed terminal hour of 22.00 is compatible with the matrix, but we propose to limit the sale of alcohol in the evening until 21.45 hours. That allows 15 minutes drinking up time. We recognise residents’ concerns about the potential for late night noise, and consider that last orders before 21.45 will facilitate the premises closing by 22.00 hours. With regard to music noise, we note that there is currently no music on the balcony, and we propose to continue that arrangement with a condition prohibiting music being played there. Where special events with any form of sound amplification, such as a microphone, are held in the café, the doors to the balcony must be kept closed, except for access and egress. Finally we propose to impose a condition requiring the erection of signs reminding patrons to be respectful of neighbours.

The application is therefore granted with the conditions agreed with the Police and the following restrictions/ conditions:-

                Supply of alcohol on the premises every day from 12.00 to 21.45 hours

                No music shall be played on the balcony

                Where special events with sound amplification are held in the café, the doors to the balcony must be kept shut, except for access and egress.

                The licensee shall ensure that prominent, clear and legible notices are displayed at all exits requesting customers to respect the needs of local residents and to leave the premises and the area quietly.

 

The Panel believes that the above conditions are appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

The applicant may appeal against the decision to impose conditions on the licence.

Any person who made a relevant representation who desires to contend that the licence ought not to have been granted, or that on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought to have imposed different or additional conditions, may appeal against the decision.

All appeals must be made to Magistrates’ Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of notification of this decision letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal

Wards affected: Wish;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Donna Lynsdale, Levente Nagy


01/11/2024 - Babble Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7355    For Determination

Application for a new Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 01/11/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 01/11/2024

Decision:

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of Panel.

 

Licensing Panel hearing held on Friday 1 November 2024 virtually in respect of the application for a new premises licence for Babble, Hove Beach Park, Kingsway, Hove, BN3 4GP

 

The panel has read all the papers including the report and relevant representations and listened to the submissions put forward at the hearing. The panel has also had regard to the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy (SOLP) and the section 182 Licensing Act 2003 statutory guidance.

 

The application is for a new premises licence, authorising the sale of alcohol by for consumption on and off the premises; live music; recorded music and late- night refreshment.

 

The premises are not situated within the Cumulative Impact Area (CIA) or the Special Stress Area (SSA). Zone (CIZ). Subject to any issues raised by the Matrix, the application falls to be determined on its own merits.

 

A “matrix” approach to licensing decisions has been adopted by the council in its SOLP. It sets out a framework of what the licensing authority would like to see within its area and gives an indication of the likelihood of success to any applicant. The matrix provides for a terminal hour of 10pm for cafes, 11pm for off-licences and midnight for late-night takeaways in “Other Areas”.

 

Originally eleven representations were received from local residents setting out concerns relating to the Prevention of Crime and Disorder, Public Safety, Prevention of Public Nuisance Protection and the Protection of Children from Harm. By the time of the hearing, 9 had been withdrawn. The remaining objectors (representations C and H) did not attend the hearing.

 

We heard from a director of the applicant company. In their presentation, and in answer to questions we were told that:

 

·       The concept of Babble is a sun-up to sundown operation, similar to Sea Lanes in Brighton, which the applicant also runs.

·       There had been prior consultation with the Police and Environmental Health. The applicant had also spoken to a number of the objectors to try to address their concerns. As a result of the consultation, a comprehensive set of conditions had been agreed - pages 46 to 49 of the agenda. These include


the measures originally proposed as part of the application – pages 29 and 30 and conditions agreed with Environmental Health – pages 43 – 44.

1.              As the building was not yet complete, it was difficult to provide a firm figure for the number of covers, but that was likely to be approximately 100 inside and a similar number outside.

2.              The tables on the terrace were all seated.

3.              Speakers would be south facing.

4.              Residents had already been provided a point of contact in the event of problems.

 

The panel has considered this application on its merits. We do not find the matrix helpful in determining a mixed-use application such as Babble. We prefer to treat the application on its own merits. We welcome the applicant’s active engagement with the Police, Environmental Health and local residents culminating in a comprehensive set of agreed conditions. In our view, these address residents’ objections.

 

The application is therefore granted with the agreed conditions. The Panel believes that they are appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives. Whilst not imposing a condition requiring regular contact to be maintained with Fairlawns Hove Limited, that is our expectation of the applicant.

 

We also feel it is appropriate to mention that a number of the representations raised planning related objections. These are not matters we can properly take into account. The Statutory Guidance at paragraph 14.65 is clear that they are 2 separate regimes.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’. A webcast of the meeting is also available.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

The applicant may appeal against the decision to impose conditions on the licence.

 

Any person who made a relevant representation who desires to contend that the licence ought not to have been granted, or that on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought to have imposed different or additional conditions, may appeal against the decision.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrates’ Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of notification of this decision letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal.

 

Wards affected: Wish;

Lead officer: Corinne Hardcastle, Levente Nagy


18/12/2024 - Daltons Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7329    For Determination

Application for a Variation of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 18/12/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 18/12/2024

Decision:

 

 RE:    Licensing Act 2003 – Licensing Panel Hearing Notification of the Determination of Panel.

 

Licensing panel hearing held on Wednesday 18th December 2024 virtually via Teams in respect of the application for a variation of a premises licence in respect of premises known as Daltons, Madeira Drive, Brighton BN2 1EN.

 

The Panel has considered all the papers and relevant representations including written submissions from the Applicants and has listened to the submissions made today. It has had regard to the Statement of Licensing Policy and the statutory guidance.

 

The application is situated within the cumulative impact zone (CIZ). Our policy states that applications for variations which are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will be refused following relevant representations. This presumption can be rebutted by the applicant if they can show that their application will have no negative cumulative impact.

 

This special policy can only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. However, the policy is not absolute. The panel must consider the individual circumstances and merits of the application. If an application is unlikely to add to the cumulative impact of the area, it may be granted.

 

The application seeks to extend hours of licensable activities notably on Friday and Saturday, add off sales of alcohol permanently to the licence, and late-night refreshment, and remove or amend 2 conditions on the licence regarding the operation of the premises and DJ performances.

 

Representations were made by Sussex Police and the Licensing Authority. Since submitting the application, the applicants have liaised with the police and the licensing authority, and a set of conditions has been produced as well as submissions from the applicants. These conditions tie the operation to being that of a grass roots music venue and are comprehensive as regards the management of the premises. It was clarified that the request for outdoor regulated entertainment was withdrawn completely and there would be restriction on the numbers on the outside terrace after midnight.

 

The police explained that as a result of agreement regarding conditions and terms of operation their objection to the application was now limited to the off sales element. They did not consider that conditions would mitigate the effect of alcohol consumption on the beach or the city centre and requested the panel refuse this aspect of the variation. The licensing authority accepted that the proposed conditions separated the premises from that of a nightclub and the application was capable of being exceptional in terms of the policy.

The applicant’s legal representative with contributions from the applicants explained the reasons for submitting the variation application and the way in which the premises operated. In terms of off sales they already had the benefit of the temporary deregulation which currently was set to expire on the 31st March but may be extended. They were seeking certainty regarding this and suggested a compromise position whereby off sales would be limited to 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. from 2 April to 30 September and 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. 1 October to 1 April. Their off sales offering was limited to draught beers, ciders and wines. There had been no issues with off sales from their premises in the 4 years it was permitted.

 

The panel has considered the application on its merits and within the context of our special policy. The panel was able to question the applicants on all aspects of their operation. The panel canvassed a last entry condition to reinforce their style of operation and further set it apart from a night club. This was broadly accepted by the applicants at midnight during the week and 01:00 hours at the weekends for the extended hours. The panel welcomes and appreciates the efforts made by the applicants and the police and licensing authority to agree a set of comprehensive conditions. It was clarified that the current conditions on the licence relating to prevention of public nuisance would remain (conditions 20 to 26). The panel agrees with the applicants, police and licensing authority that this application as a whole constitutes an exception to our policy due to the style of operation and is not likely to add to negative cumulative impact. As regards the off sales element, the panel do appreciate the police concerns but take into account the fact that off sales have been part of the licence for some years now and seemingly without issue. They only represent a small aspect of the business. The panel therefore agree to grant off sales with the reduced times as offered: from 10am to 10pm 2nd April to 30th September and from 10am to 8 pm from the 1st October to 1st April. The premises has agreed to these times and they will thus be the times adhered to on the licence whether or not the deregulation is continued. Although it was not specifically canvassed, since it reflects the current offering, the panel also add a condition as follows: Off sales shall be limited to the sale of draught beers, cider and wine.

 

The panel thus grant the application with all the conditions set out in the Annex 3 submitted including that proposed in the submission: ‘From 00.00hrs to close daily the capacity of the outside terrace to be restricted to 100 persons (excluding staff)’, along with the off sales restrictions and condition as above and the last entry time condition. Overall, the panel consider the application will promote the licensing objectives and not add to negative cumulative impact.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.         The applicant may appeal against the decision to modify/impose conditions.

 

2.         A person who has made a relevant representation may appeal against the grant of the variation or any condition attached.

 

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. A fee is payable on the lodging of an appeal. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

Wards affected: Kemptown;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi


22/11/2024 - Fika Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7354    For Determination

Application for New Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 22/11/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 22/11/2024

Decision:

 

Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) - Notification of the Determination of

Panel.

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Friday 22nd November 2024 in respect of the application for a new premises licence for premises known as Fika, 1 Victoria Gove, Hove, BN3 2LJ

 

The Panel has read all the papers and has listened to the submissions made at the hearing. It has had regard to the Statement of Licensing Policy and the statutory guidance.

 

This is an application for a new premises licence for a café and eatery to sell alcohol on the premises including an external seating area from 09:00 to 21:00 every day.

 

The premises falls within the Special Stress Area (SSA) which, as detailed in our statement of licensing policy, is deemed an area of special concern in terms of the relatively high levels of crime and disorder and public nuisance experienced within it.

Two representations were made by local residents with concerns relating to the prevention of public nuisance.

 

The applicant has agreed a set of conditions with the police. These include café conditions and no vertical drinking, with food available at all times.

 

The panel heard from the applicant about the nature of the premises and style of operation. He did email those who made representations with an invitation to meet but did not hear back. There would be no recorded music as a licensable activity but as incidental background only. It was not a late evening premises or a bar. There would be a limited range of alcohol on sale. The outside area was part of their premises so did not require a pavement licence but would be subject to all the conditions on the licence. He would liaise with residents in the event of any issues and in the summer may consider noise containing measures outside if appropriate.

 

The panel has considered this application on its merits having regard to the representations. It is a modest application and one which is consistent with the policy and matrix. The panel considered that the applicant demonstrated a responsible and respectful attitude towards his neighbours and the prevention of public nuisance. He showed a willingness to respond to issues raised and to work to resolve them. The panel did not consider it was the style of operation which would add to problems in the area. The panel has therefore decided to grant the application with all conditions


agreed with the police attached and those from the operating schedule, which will promote the

licensing objectives. Condition 7 regarding the outside area was unlikely to apply and could therefore be removed.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the rubric ‘Council and democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights (Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.   A person who has made a relevant representation may appeal against grant of the licence, or any condition attached.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. A fee is payable upon lodging an appeal. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

 

Wards affected: Central Hove;

Lead officer: Levente Nagy


19/12/2024 - Addressing Infant Mortality – Baby Box Initiative ref: 7349    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)               Request the Health & Wellbeing Board to review the possibility of working with the 3rd sector to Distribute BabyBoxes to up-to 100 newborns annually in the most deprived postcodes including essential items like clothing, bedding, and personal care products.

 

2)               Explore collaboration with health professionals and community organisations to ensure effective delivery.

 

3)               Advocate for enhanced national implementation and collaborate with government and local authorities to share insights.

 

4)               If a program is considered deliverable, collect data on program uptake and impact to guide future expansion and integrate the BabyBox program into wider strategies targeting health disparities, working with partners in health, education, and social care.


19/12/2024 - Motion for the Ocean ref: 7350    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)               Request officers to bring a report to Cabinet which explores:

 

·        The actions and projects that will contribute to an ocean recovery in/around Brighton and Hove.

 

·        How to embed ocean recovery in all strategic decisions, plans, budgets, procurement and approaches to decisions by the Council (particularly in planning, regeneration, skills and economic policy), aligning with climate change mitigation and adaptation requirements, and considering ocean-based solutions in our journey towards a carbon neutral and climate resilient future.

 

·        How to ensure that local planning supports ocean recovery, working closely with the Marine Management Organisation to embed strong links between the Local Plan and the Southeast Marine Plan.

 

·        What work can be delivered with partners locally to improve water quality and increase sustainability in marine industries, and to promote a sustainable “blue economy” that delivers ocean recovery and local prosperity; including the local fishing industry and the vital work of Sussex IFCA.

 

·        How to grow ocean literacy and marine citizenship, fostering pride in our seaside city, including: a. How to ensure pupils are given the opportunity to experience the ocean first-hand before leaving primary school. b. Exploring how the council can work with cultural, business and civic organisations throughout the city to promote marine and coastline clean[1]ups and volunteer opportunities.


19/12/2024 - Fraud Error and Debt Bill ref: 7351    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)               Request that a report is brought to a future Cabinet meeting once the bill is published which:

 

a)     sets out the potential impact of these new powers on B&HCC, including the

 

b)     impact on benefit claimants and of new administrative responsibilities;

 

c)     explores the legal duties that would fall on the Council in enforcing any measures in the bill.

 


19/12/2024 - Keep the £2 Bus Fare Cap ref: 7352    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

Resolved to:

 

1)               Commend the Cabinet Member for Transport, Parking and Public Realm for having proactively met with local bus companies to discuss how we could work together to keep the bus fare cap, at the lowest possible cost to the Council;

 

2)               Give encouragement to the Leader of the Council to engage in devolution discussions with the government which could gift new powers for our region to take buses back under public control as Mayor Andy Burnham and Mayor Steve Rotherham have successfully done.


06/12/2024 - Whitecliffs Cafe Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions) ref: 7353    For Determination

Application for a Review of a Premises Licence under the Licensing Act 2003

Decision Maker: Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Made at meeting: 06/12/2024 - Licensing Panel (Licensing Act 2003 Functions)

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 06/12/2024

Decision:

Licensing panel hearing held virtually via Teams on Friday 6th December 2024 in respect of the review of a premises licence in respect of premises known as Whitecliffs, Marine Drive, Saltdean, Brighton, BN2 8SQ.

The panel has considered this application for review, relevant representations, submissions including noise monitoring report and noise management plan and other additional information, including photos and videos. The panel has listened carefully to all submissions made at the hearing. The panel has had regard to the Licensing Act 2003, Statutory Guidance and the Statement of Licensing Policy.

The review is brought by ward Councillor Bridget Fishleigh based on the prevention of public nuisance, and prevention of children from harm licensing objectives. Two representations were received from the Licensing Authority & Environmental Protection Team outlining their history with the premises and proposing some conditions. Two representations were received in support of the review from local residents and one from a local Councillor.

The Licence holder Julieanne Gilburt has submitted documentation setting out the circumstances regarding the past operation of the premises, her proposals and explaining that she had taken recent control of the premises and changed the style of operation. She has also engaged the services of an experienced noise expert who prepared a detailed noise monitoring report and noise management plan.

The main grounds for the review are noise disturbance caused by late night live and recorded music events held at the premises. It is also alleged that several conditions are being breached. The other ward Councillor and 2 local residents confirmed the noise issues which had existed, but it was agreed by all that since the current licence holder had taken over sole control of the premises and reduced the hours of operation there had been no complaints. The Environmental Protection officer stated that their department had not been able to substantiate the noise complaints but proposed some additional conditions for the


licence. The officer representing the licensing authority welcomed the proposals made by the licence holder and proposed some conditions to update the licence and promote the licensing objectives.

In presenting her case, Julieanne Gilburt, licence holder, explained the action she had taken since taking over the premises on 3rd October 2024 and her new business model which included a reduction in the hours of operation. From Sunday to Thursday licensable activities would terminate at 23:00 hours closing at 23:30 and on Friday and Saturday licensable activities would cease at 00:30 closing at 01:00. She had received lots of support and encouragement from social media groups. Her noise expert David Monk spoke about the acoustic report he had prepared which demonstrated that the current sound system at the premises was capable of operating inaudibly at the nearest noise sensitive premises and with minimal disturbance on the beach. Any third party using their own equipment would be required to demonstrate the same inaudibility criteria set out in the management plan and conduct noise tests. He submitted that implementation of the noise management plan he had produced meant that most of the public nuisance conditions on the licence were redundant and not appropriate including those proposed by the environmental protection officer. He was agreeable to the management plan being incorporated into a condition on the licence.

The panel was able to question all the parties and canvass all the proposed conditions including the appropriateness of the current licence conditions. The panel must take such statutory steps under the Licensing Act in response to the review as are appropriate to promote the licensing objectives. In this case, with universal agreement, the appropriate action is to modify the conditions of the licence and this can include adjustment of hours for licensable activities and opening times. The panel recognises and welcomes the efforts made and action taken by the licence holder since taking over the premises. It is clear that the issues which instigated the review have been overtaken by events and that the new business model is operating without undermining the licensing objective of prevention of public nuisance. In view of this it is appropriate to amend the licence to reflect this model and to update the licence conditions. As to hours of operation the panel considers that it is appropriate to allow a degree of flexibility to the licence holder on Friday and Saturday and there have been no issues with noise despite 9 events having been held. It is a significant reduction from the 03:00 - 03:30 hours currently on the licence for Friday and Saturday.

Thus, the hours for licensable activities and opening will be as stated above and proposed by the licence holder: From Sunday to Thursday licensable activities will terminate at 23:00 hours with closing at 23:30 and on Friday and Saturday licensable activities will cease at 00:30 with closing at 01:00. For New Years Eve licensable activities will cease at 01:30 and close at 02:00.

In terms of conditions, the panel attach those proposed by the licensing officer and which are in the papers as an appendix to her representation (pages 50 to 52 of the agenda papers). As a consequence of these and the reduced hours it is appropriate to remove conditions 1, 3, 5,6 and 7 from Annex 2 of the current licence under prevention of crime and disorder. Condition 2 relating to personal licence holders will be changed from 2 to at least 1 of the staff holding a personal licence. For public safety under the current licence (annex 2) these conditions can remain because as long as off sales are permitted under Section 172F of the Licensing Act 2003, conditions prohibiting off sales on a licence are suspended.

Regarding conditions for the prevention of public nuisance the panel recognise that there is a comprehensive noise management plan dated 1.12.24 produced by David Monk Environmental Ltd which reflects and follows the noise monitoring report produced in


respect of the premises. Therefore, in place of all the existing public nuisance conditions on the licence the panel thus attach the following condition to the licence:

The premises licence holder shall adhere to the Noise Management plan dated 1.12.24 produced by David Monk Environmental Ltd. A copy shall be lodged with the licensing authority and any significant amendments shall be approved by the licensing authority in consultation with environmental protection. This plan details how the licence holder will manage noise and any noise nuisance arising from noise sources including music and entertainment at the premises and patrons and includes the following provisions:

·       Measures to ensure inaudibility in the nearest noise sensitive premises

·       Signage requesting patrons to leave quietly and respect local residents

·       Physical and managerial noise controls, processes and procedures including regular and documented noise monitoring

·       Details of how compliance with control limits is achieved and procedures to identify and address noncompliance

·       Details of community liaison and complaints logging and investigation

·       Details of review of the noise management plan

 

In respect of the existing conditions under Annex 2 for the protection of children from harm, condition 1 will be replaced by the challenge 25 condition, condition 2 is covered by the new training conditions and so is removed, condition 3 is not necessary in view of all the other conditions and controls imposed.

 

The panel believes that these steps are an appropriate and proportionate response to the review and will promote the licensing objectives.

 

Please note: This determination does not take effect until the end of the period given below for appealing against the decision or, if the decision is appealed against, the time the appeal is disposed of.

 

The minutes of the panel will be available on the Council’s website under the heading ‘Council and Democracy’.

 

Appeal Rights

(Section 181 and schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003)

 

1.              The licence holder may appeal against the decision made.

2.              The applicant for review may appeal against the decision made.

3.              Any person who made a relevant representation in relation to the application may appeal against the decision made.

 

All appeals must be made to Magistrate’s Court, Edward Street, Brighton, within 21 days of deemed delivery of this letter. Delivery will be deemed to have been effected on the second working day after posting.

 

Wards affected: Rottingdean & West Saltdean;

Lead officer: Charles Boufrahi, Levente Nagy


19/12/2024 - Timetable of Meetings for 2025/26 ref: 7330    Recommendations Approved

This report seeks approval for the timetable of meetings for 2025/26

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

1)    That the proposed timetable of meetings for the 2025/26 municipal year be agreed; subject to any necessary amendments following changes to the Constitution and/or committees’ requirements.

Wards affected: (All Wards);

Lead officer: John Peel


19/12/2024 - Smartphone Free Schools for Brighton & Hove ref: 7344    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

1)     That the petition is noted.

 


19/12/2024 - Decriminalise Sex Work and Prioritise Safety ref: 7345    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

1)     That the petition is noted.

 


19/12/2024 - Halt the current consultation into school admission boundaries ref: 7342    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

1)               That the petition be noted.


19/12/2024 - Save the Winter Fuel Payment ref: 7343    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Council

Made at meeting: 19/12/2024 - Council

Decision published: 23/01/2025

Effective from: 19/12/2024

Decision:

1)     That the petition is noted.

 


 


Brighton & Hove City Council | Hove Town Hall | Hove | BN3 3BQ | Tel: (01273) 290000 | Mail: info@brighton-hove.gov.uk | how to find us | comments & complaints