Agenda item

The Sub-Committee to determine an application for a new premises licence.

Decision:

That the Premises Licence for The Green Man, 29 Scotgate, Stamford PE9 2YQ be granted subject to the revised Premises Licence conditions agreed with Lincolnshire Police (Appendix 2) and those contained within the letter sent to those who had made representations (Appendix 6) together with confirmation of the timing in respect of indoor sports 9:00am to 1:00am.

The Chairman introduced those present and asked who would be speaking in relation to the application before the Sub-Committee.  The Premises Licence holder, George Sakkalli confirmed that he would be speaking in respect of the application before the Sub-Committee.  No other parties were present.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report which was for a new Premises Licence for The Green Man, Scotgate, Stamford.  The Licensing Authority had been notified by Lincolnshire Police in November 2025 that the previous licence had lapsed as the Limited Company which had held the licence had been dissolved in August 2025.

In December 2025 an application was received for a new Premises Licence. The application asked for the same licensed area, similar activities and timings as highlighted within the report.  During the consultation period Lincolnshire Police submitted a representation that was subsequently withdrawn after revised Premise Licence conditions were agreed between both parties.  A copy of the new conditions were attached at Appendix 2 of the report.

Also during the consultation period over 20 residents submitted representations to the application, with one representator wishing to remain anonymous and one representation not accepted as it was deemed not relevant.

The applicant had met with some of the residents from the retirement housing complex and proposed revised timings for all activities, which were subsequently agreed and the group of residents withdraw their representations.

It was stated that there were still a number of representations that were still outstanding and these were appended to the report at Appendix 4.  The representations had raised concerns over historic instances of alleged noise disturbances, as well as concerns over a potential increase in noise and anti-social behaviour as a result of the new application.  A location plan had been appended to the report (Appendix 5) showing the proximity of the premises to the local residential properties.

A further letter had been sent by the applicant to those who had submitted representations responding to their concerns and this was appended to the report at Appendix 6.

Licensing Officers had delegated authority to decide whether a representation was relevant, vexatious or frivolous however, Section 9 of the Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 stated:

9.9 It is recommended that, in borderline cases, the benefit of the doubt about any aspect of a representation should be given to the person making that representation.  The subsequent hearing would then provide an opportunity for the person or body making the representation to amplify and clarify it.

It was felt that the representations at Appendix 4 did not fall within the delegated authority.

Where relevant representations are made, the authority must:

 i.        Hold a hearing to consider them, unless the authority, the applicant and each person who has made such representation agree that a hearing is unnecessary, and

ii.         Having regard to the representations, take such steps mentioned below (if any) as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The steps available to the Sub-Committee were:

-    Grant the application subject to conditions that are consistent with the operating schedule modified to the extent that the committee considered appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives and any mandatory conditions that must be included under the Licensing Act 2003.

-    Exclude from the scope of the licence a licensable activity to which the application relates.

-    Refuse to specify a person in the licence as a Premises Supervisor (DPS).

-    Reject the whole or part of the application.

When determining the application the licensing authority should give appropriate weight to;

-    The steps that ae appropriate to promote the licensing objectives

-    The representation (including supporting information) presented by the parties.

-    The guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

-    South Kesteven District Council’s Licensing Policy.

Paragraph 9.37 of the guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 stated:

“As a matter of practice, Licensing Authorities should seek to focus the hearing on the steps considered appropriate to promote the particular licensing objective or objectives that have given rise to the specific representation and avoid straying into undisputed areas. A responsible authority or other person may choose to rely on their written representation.

They may not add further representations to those disclosed to the applicant prior to the hearing, but they may expand on their existing representation and should be allowed sufficient time to do so, within reasonable and practical time limits.”

A Member asked if, since the report had been written, whether there were still outstanding representations to which the Licensing Officer confirmed that there were still some outstanding representations.  The Premise Licence Holder indicated that he had met with one of the representatives over the weekend who had indicated they would withdraw their representation.  The Licensing Officer confirmed that an email had been received but there was still concern about the timing of when outside music would be switched off.

The Premise Licence Holder then made their representation and stated that the biggest concern with the those who had made representations was the 2am finish time.  It was stated that this was not for everyday but just for New Years Eve.  The Premise Licence Holder then read out to the Committee the letter, appended to the report at Appendix 6, which addressed the concerns that had been raised by the representations and also reduced the hours requested in the original application form.  He confirm that there was no longer a jukebox on the premise and that the volume of any music played would be restricted and this included the garden.  He stated that there had been two speakers within the garden and this had been reduced to one speaker.  The Premise Licence Holder gave examples of the work done within the community and fund raising that was carried out in relation to organisations such as the Stamford Rugby Club and it was also stated that this was a forces pub.  He spoke about the hours that had been reduced and spoke about the types of music that would be played at the premises with live music in the summer being pulled back to 9pm in the outside garden.

Members questioned the Premises Licence Holder with one Member asking if food was served at the premise.  It was stated that this was not the case currently, however, this was something that would be considered in the future.  Another question was asked about the early morning opening and it was stated that there was guest accommodation on site and this was to accommodate them and also occasions such as those wishing to use the premise for gatherings such as wakes, the early opening was for social reasons.

The Licensing Officer asked for clarification in respect of the indoor sports timing and also New Years Eve which the Premise Licence Holder clarified.

The Licensing Officer then gave their closing statement reminding the Sub-Committee to consider all representations made in respect of the new Premise Licence and having regard to all the relevant guidance and South Kesteven District Council’s Licensing Policy for the promotion of the four licensing objectives:

-    The Prevention of Crime and Disorder

-    Public Safety

-    The Prevention of Public Nuisance

-    The Protection of Children from Harm

The Premise Licence Holder stated that he was just running a family business.

(10:30 the Licensing Officer and applicant left the meeting)

Members considered the application before them having regard to all relevant policies and guidance, the report and the representations made.  It was noted that the Premises Licence Holder had communicated with those who had made representations where possible, and had addressed their concerns with reducing hours and clarifying the type of establishment he wished to run in promoting the licensing objectives.  He had modified the licensing conditions following discussions with the Police.   It was noted that if there were any problems in the future with the premise, it would come back to Committee.  It was therefore, proposed, seconded and agreed to grant the licence with the conditions as outlined in the appendices and including the indoor sport timings.

(10:37  the Licensing Officers and applicant returned to the meeting)

The Legal Advisor read out the Sub-Committees decision.  The  Sub-Committee had read all the paperwork before them including the Section 182 Guidance and South Kesteven District Council’s Licensing Policy and the representations made. They have heard from the Licensing Officer and Mr Sakkalli the Premises Licence holder. No objectors attended the hearing.

The Premises Licence holder set out the revised timings as detailed in his letter to residents and included with the agenda pack. He did advise when questioned, that the timing for indoor sports was 09.00am to 1am and not 1.30am as set out in his letter. The Premises Licence Holder set out the details of his letter to the Sub-Committee which detailed the business he would be running, the intention of the business and what they intended to do in terms of promoting the licensing objectives.

The Sub-Committee considered all options available to them. They noted the additional conditions that had been agreed with Lincolnshire Police and the revised timings for the application. Having considered the objections, the timings and the additional conditions, the Sub-Committee decided that it is appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives to grant the licence subject to those additions.

There was a right of appeal to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of the licence decision being received.