|
The Parties:
The Licensing Sub-Committee convened to
consider an application for a premises licence where relevant
representations have been received.
At the hearing the Sub-Committee heard from
Anna McDowell (Senior Licensing Officer, Miss Walkosz (the
applicant), Mr Patel (applicants representative), and Lincolnshire
Police.
Policy and
Guidance:
In reaching its decision the Sub-Committee has
had due regard for all that they have read, heard, and seen, and
has considered the statutory guidance issued under Section 182 of
the Licensing Act 2003, along with the Council’s Statement of
Licensing Policy, and their public sector duty under the Equality
Act 2010.
Decision and
Reasons:
Miss Walkosz attended with Mr
Patel representing her. It was clarified that Mr Patel is an
accountant based in central London. He has previously advised
applicants for 10 and 12 Red Lion Street and he confirmed that he
had no other clients in Boston. ……………………………………………….
Ms Walkosz has a personal
licence and would not allow …….
to have anything to do with the
business.
……………………………………………….
Lincolnshire Police explained,
as per the paperwork, the PSPO area and then the relationship
between ……. and 10 and
12 Red Lion Street, noting the issues of illegality at those
premises and the revocation of licences. Lincolnshire Police noted
that Miss Walkosz had previously advised that …………………………………………………………………………………….
Lincolnshire police also
questioned Miss Walkosz regarding Mr Patel and she advised she had
found him through Google. On questioning, Mr Patel then confirmed
he had represented persons involved with 10 and 12 Red Lion
Street.
Having Having considered all of the information the
sub-committee considered on the balance of probabilities that there
was sufficient evidence of relationships between her and
……. who had
connections to illegal activities at 10 and 12 Red Lion Street.
With this in mind and noting the application the sub-committee were
of the view it was not appropriate for the promotion of the
licensing objectives to grant the licence as applied for. They
considered whether conditions, exclusion of the DPS or licensable
activity would appropriately promote the licensing objectives but
were of the view that with the
connection of the applicant to others involved in illegal activity,
those steps would not promote the licensing objectives.
The application was therefore
refused in order that the four licensing objectives would continue
to be promoted
|
PDF 62 KB