Agenda and minutes

Licensing Committee - Friday, 3rd July, 2020 11.00 am

Venue: Virtual meeting - this meeting will be held remotely

Contact: Lucy Bonshor 

Items
No. Item

48.

Register of attendance and apologies for absence

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    All Members were present with the exception of Councillor Morgan.

49.

Disclosure of interests

    • Share this item

    Members are asked to disclose any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

    Minutes:

    Councillor Broughton indicated that he may know the applicant under discussion at agenda item 4 and he withdrew from the meeting during discussion of this item and took no part in the debate or decision.

50.

Minutes of the meeting held on 22 May 2020 pdf icon PDF 91 KB

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    The minutes from the meeting held on 22 May 2020 were agreed.

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The press and public were excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business because of the likelihood that information that was exempt under paragraph 1 and 2 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) would be disclosed to them.

51.

Application for a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Dual Driver's Licence

    Report ENV755 from the Licensing Officer.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Decision:

     

    The Licensing Committee refused to issue a licence to drive a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire vehicle on the grounds that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to hold such a licence under Section 59 (1) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

     

    The applicant was not in attendance.

     

    The Licensing Officer presented exempt report ENV755 which concerned an application for a hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence.  The application had been received in January 2020 by the Licensing team and was duly processed.  Only one conviction had been brought to the Licensing team’s attention which had occurred 10 years ago.  The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) application was checked and submitted in January 2020. 

     

    In May 2020 the applicants completed enhanced DBS was received by the Licensing team.  Various convictions were shown during a period between May 2000 and May 2009.  The applicant was contacted and advised that due to the nature of the convictions his application would be referred to the Licensing Committee for determination.

     

    Questions about the applicant’s address were queried by the Committee to which the Licensing Officer replied.  A comment was also made in relation to spent convictions and the Committee was informed that in respect of hackney carriage driver applications convictions were never spent.

     

    The Licensing Officer then gave his closing statement.  Members were asked to consider the report and appendices before them, and any further information made during the course of the meeting and decide whether to:

     

    -        Issue a licence to driver a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire vehicle, or

    -        Refuse to issue a licence to drive a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire vehicle on the grounds that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to hold such a licence under Section 59 (1) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

     

    (11:18am Licensing Officers left the meeting)

     

    Members discussed the application before them.  The Legal Advisor gave Members some general advice to take into consideration in respect of the application before them such as the threat to the safety of the public, the seriousness of the convictions, the date the convictions happened and the age of the applicant at the time of the convictions.   She also drew Members attention to guidance issued and the Council’s own Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy and Councillor’s Handbook.

     

    Members were extremely concerned about the behaviour of the applicant during the time that the convictions happened, although it was acknowledged that an extensive period of time had passed since the last conviction, with a clear record.  The fact that the applicant was not in attendance to give any mitigating information to the Committee to take into consideration was also highlighted.   Discussion on deferring a decision was raised, although it was noted that the applicant had been given the opportunity to attend the meeting or submit any representation.  The applicant had referred to character references within an e-mail received but  despite indicating to the applicant to arrange for references to be submitted before the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

52.

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1982: An Application to Renew a Sexual Entertainment Venue Licence - Taboo Gentleman's Club, 99A Westgate, Grantham pdf icon PDF 253 KB

    • Share this item

    Report from the Licensing Officer.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Decision:

     

    To approve the renewal of the application for a Sexual Entertainment Venue Licence for Taboo Gentleman’s Club, 99A Westgate, Grantham in accordance with Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended by the Police and Crime Act 2009.

     

    The applicant’s solicitor, Mr Kent was present at the meeting.  

     

    Members had been circulated with report ENV753 which concerned the renewal of a licence for a Sexual Entertainment Venue for Taboo Gentleman’s Club, 99A Westgate, Grantham.  In accordance with the authority’s procedures all applications relating to sex entertainment venues with the exception of uncontested transfer applications were to be heard by the Licensing Committee.

     

    The Policing and Crime Act 2009 amended Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 to permit the Licensing Authority to license sex establishments.  A sex establishment was any premises, vessel or stall where relevant entertainment was provided before a live audience for the financial gain of the organiser or entertainer.

     

    The applicant had held a licence to run the premises as a sexual entertainment venue since 2012 until the renewal application had been submitted.  One valid objection had been received from an interested party.  The objector felt that the market square of a historic market town was not an appropriate location for a venue of this type and discouraged, other more reputable businesses from establishing themselves in town.

     

    No representation had been received from the Police, the only responsible authority required to be served with a copy of the application under Schedule 3, paragraph 10(14) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982.

     

    Each application had to be determined on its own merits; however, applications could only be refused on certain defined mandatory or discretionary grounds and these were listed within the report.

     

    The Licensing Officer confirmed that there had been no complaints or disturbances to which the Police had attended.

     

    The applicant’s solicitor, Mr Kent then made his representation.  He referred to when the premises had first been licensed in 2010 before the authority took over the issuing of the licence in 2012.  He then listed the subsequent years that the licence had been renewed by the authority including the variation to the licence that had taken place in 2014.    He and his clients had attended the meetings up until 2017 but had not attended in 2018 or 2019 as no representations had been received.   Although an objection had been received in the early years of the licence renewal, none had been received in the intervening years.  No Police objection had been received to the renewal. The representation received was in keeping with the grant or renewal of the licence due to the character of the relevant locality.  Nothing had changed in relation to the location since the last renewal was granted and he invited Members to renew the licence.

     

    The Licensing Officer then gave his closing statement.  He reminded Members that the application should be considered on its own merits and the Committee should have regard to South  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

53.

Close of meeting

    • Share this item

    Minutes:

    The meeting closed at 12:15pm.