Agenda item

Date of hearing

16 March 2020

Members of  Sub-Committee

Councillor Jonathan Noble

Councillor Tom Ashton

Councillor  Judith Skinner

Applicant(s) Name

Mr M I Qutab

Premises Address

 The Great Northern, 23 Station Street, Boston

Date Application Received

10 February 2020

Details of Application

Application for variation of a Premises Licence to specify an individual as the Designated Premises Supervisor under the Licensing Act 2003.

The Parties:

Mr Qutab, has applied for variation of the Licence to specify himself as the Designated Premises Supervisor at The Great Northern, 23 Station Street, Boston.

The Chief Officer of Police has given notice that he is satisfied that the exceptional circumstances of the case is such that granting the variation of Designated Premises Supervisor would undermine the  prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective.

Policy and Guidance:

In reaching its decision, the sub-committee has considered the statutory guidance issued under S182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and Boston Borough Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

Licensing Objectives:

The sub-committee has found that the licensing objective of the prevention of crime and disorder is relevant to this application. 

Decision: 

The sub-committee has decided to refuse the application.   

Reasons:  The reasons for the sub-committee reaching this decision are as follows:

The sub-committee has read and heard all of the information before them.  The sub-committee heard from the Licensing & Land Charges Manager, Sgt Enderby on behalf of Lincolnshire Police, and Mr Qutab.

The sub-committee is aware of and has taken into account any implications that may arise from the Human Rights Act 1998.

The sub-committee in reaching its decision has had due regard for its public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 and consider that in reaching their decision they have fulfilled their duty under the Equality Act 2010.

At the start of the hearing Mr Qutab produced additional documents in support of his case.  Lincolnshire Police agreed for the documents to be put before the members of the sub-committee.  The sub-committee considered, and also had regard for the additional documents in reaching their decision.

Mr Qutab explained to the sub-committee how he has experienced some health issues of late, and provided a letter from his doctor to evidence this. 

Mr Qutab detailed to the sub-committee that he has run a number of licensed premises, and how he cooperates with the police.  He explained to the sub-committee that he had undertaken some training in cellar management but his health has prevented him from pursuing more training but he considered that he had gained experience and knowledge over the years. 

When questioned Mr Qutab confirmed he had not brought any evidence of staff training or refusal logs with him.  He confirmed that the drug policy for the premises was the poster he had supplied at the start of the hearing.  Mr Qutab provided a brief explanation of the refusals policy operated at the premises.

In confirming what training he had undertaken since 2018, Mr Qutab explained to the sub-committee that he had not undertaken the DPS course as he had not been able to find information on it, and how he did not believe the BIIAB course had changed much since he sat it. 

Mr Qutab was able to list the 4 licensing objectives, but was only able to supply a brief explanation of how he promotes them at the premises; he mentioned having posters displaying the drugs policy, asking patrons to leave quietly and displaying Challenge 25.

Lincolnshire Police addressed the sub-committee and urged the sub-committee to refuse the application as they felt Mr Qutab poses a great risk to the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective.  The police have grave concerns about Mr Qutab’s ability to fulfil the role of DPS given his history of shortcomings in running licensed premises (both as DPS and Premises Licence Holder) as evidenced by the numerous decisions of the sub-committee.

The sub-committee notes how Mr Qutab has been removed from the role of DPS on previous occasions, and how premises licenses have been reviewed and had action taken against them during the course of his time as DPS and/or PLH.

The police outlined how in having attended all of the other hearings in respect of licensed premises, how Mr Qutab has previously been supplied with all of the tools to be able to run a premises successfully, and to better his knowledge, and to learn from the previous incidents.  Lincolnshire Police explained how in their opinion Mr Qutab has not undertaken any such training or learned from previous mistakes. 

In reaching its decision the sub-committee had due regard for all that they have read and heard, the S182 Guidance, the Licensing Act 2003, the licensing objectives and the Council’s licensing policy.

Having done so, the sub-committee has decided on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Qutab is not a suitable person to be a DPS and accordingly refuse the application.

In reaching its decision the sub-committee had particular regard to the fact that Mr Qutab has not undertaken any specific training to assist him with successfully fulfilling the role of DPS despite there being multiple licensing sub-committee decisions questioning his knowledge of the role and running licensed premises.

The sub-committee is also concerned that Mr Qutab was still unable to satisfy them of his ability to fulfil the role of DPS; when questioned he provided a very basic explanation of the refusals policy operated at the premises, and of his knowledge of the operation of licensing objectives at the premises.

The sub-committee is also concerned with Mr Qutab’s health and his ability to fulfil the role of DPS.  Whilst the sub-committee is aware that a DPS does not need to be at the premises every day, but they are in control of the day-to-day management and running of the premises.  Mr Qutab admitted that due to his health issues he only has 2-4 hours a day for both work and his family, and also admitted that he is currently behind on paperwork as a result.  The sub-committee has to hold all applicants to be a DPS to the same standard.

The application is therefore refused.

Appeal Provisions

The Sub-Committee would like to remind the parties that there is a right of appeal to the Magistrates’ Court under Section 181 of the Licensing Act 2003.  The circumstances in which parties may appeal are detailed in Schedule 5 to the Licensing Act 2003.

The appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal to the Justice’s Chief Executive for the Magistrates Court within the period of 21 days beginning with day on which the party was notified by the Licensing Authority of the decision being appealed against (i.e. the date of this decision notice).

Appeal should be made to Lincoln Magistrates’ court at 358 High St, Lincoln, LN5 7QA

Upon hearing an appeal the Magistrates’ Court may

a)    Dismiss the appeal,

b)    Substitute for the decision appealed against any other decision which could have been made by the Licensing Authority, or

c)    Remit the case to the Licensing Authority to dispose of it in accordance with the direction of the court,

And make such order as to costs it thinks fit.