Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Lee Mason was appointed as chair for this meeting.

There were no declarations of members interests.

The purpose of the report by the Licensing Manager is for the committee to consider and determine a review application pursuant to section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003 ("the Act") and in respect of the following premises:

Melody, 229-231 Commercial Road, Portsmouth, PO1 4BJ

The application, with grounds for the review, are set out in Appendix A of the report and the application has been submitted by the Chief Officer of Police.

The committee is requested to determine the review application.

Decision to revoke premises licence

The Committee heard the representations of the licence holder, the relevant Responsible Authorities and the advocate acting upon behalf of the licence holder.  In addition the Committee members considered all the papers put before them along with the annexes attached to each document.

The committee was assisted by an interpreter instructed by the Local Authority to assist the Licence holder to deal with this application.

The Responsible Authorities (Police and Licensing) asserted that the licensee has failed in the administration of the licence and failed to promote the licensing objective with particular regard to the licensing objectives of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance and public safety.

The Committee look to all the Responsible Authorities, but mainly the Police, for guidance and assistance in determining the effect of a licensing activity in terms of all the licensing objectives, but principally in terms of the Police, prevention of crime and disorder - the Committee should but are not obliged to accept all reasonable and proportionate representations made by the Police.

The Committee take a similar view with respect to the representations made by the Licensing Department.

The above stated, the Committee balanced within their consideration all representations made by the licence holder through their advocate and by way of comments made by the current licensee via her interpreter.

In considering the application for review the Committee was mindful of the following facts as having been established upon a balance of probability and further that they have been specifically taken to the relevant parts of the Statutory Guidance under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003. 

A key function of the Committee is to review the licences that are referred to them by the relevant Responsible Authority(s) and consider through the process each case upon its own facts and merits.

The Committee considered the Licence Holder's Human Rights and in particular Article 8 on the issue of a right to a fair hearing and were satisfied that the Licence Holder had and has sufficient support to understand and engage with the process in its totality given that an interpreter was present and that the Licence Holder has sufficient understanding of English to obtain a Personal Licence, coupled with carrying out the function of DPS.

1.    The Committee was cognisant of a range of incidents occurring in April, May and June 2017, the common theme being material breaches of the current licence with the continued inability of the licence holder to correctly adhere to the closing times set out in the original licence being evident on a number of occasions.  The Licensing Committee had seen the evidential train dealing with the warnings provided by the police and was entitled to conclude that the assurance of the Licence Holder was either not adhered to or that the management in place at the establishment was lacking to the extent that breaches were not dealt with and the primary conditions of the licence complied with.

2.    The Committee had seen  ...  view the full decision text for item 68.

Present

Mrs Wei Wei Jin, Licence Holder (accompanied by interpreter provided by the local authority, Ms Jia Lin)

James Culverwell, Licence Holder's Legal Adviser

Peter Baulf, Legal Adviser (accompanied by Claudia Baulf, observing)

Ross Lee, Licensing Officer

Responsible Authorities:

i)             PC Pete Rackham

ii)            Nickii Humphreys, Licensing Manager

Councillor David Fuller explained that he was attending as a reserve member as Councillor Gerald Vernon-Jackson was not able to attend for family reasons.

The Chair opened the meeting by asking everyone to introduce themselves and the procedure for the meeting had been circulated.

Licensing Officer's report on the review application

Mr Ross Lee presented his report, which had been circulated to and read by members, and explained the separation of roles with the Licensing Manager Ms Humphreys on the review file. Another Licensing Officer, Mr Stone, was separately considering the criminal liability angle caused by the breaches of the licence.  He concluded that the committee had a wide range of discretion open to them from taking no action to revoking the licence.

There were no questions to Mr Lee from the members or any other parties.

The Licence Holder's Case

Mr Culverwell, representing Mrs Jin, stated that whilst she accepted most of the facts as set out, there had been considerable difficulties in the translation and interpreting of the strict obligations (friends had translated at the time of the visits to the premises).  Therefore she accepted that the karaoke rooms were in use and customers were there drinking alcohol but not that alcohol had been sold after 11pm.  Her understanding was that if alcohol was not sold after 11pm and no new customers were admitted this was not in breach of her licence, as this was a private party. She denied the allegations that customers were able to drink as much as they liked for a fixed fee (the posters showed fixed quantities of alcohol) and they could not help themselves. She was now aware that the playing of recorded music after 11pm was not covered by her licence.

Questions were then asked by the panel members which included:

·         How smoking on the premises was dealt with and the use of smoke detectors

·         The drinks promotion details

·         Whether there had been discussion of 'opening hours' on the visits by the police and licensing officers

·         How the whisky had been dispensed from the bottles and in what measures (it was reported that this was diluted with juice in the jugs also seen in the pictures, and was poured by the staff)

·         How any drunk customers were handled (in response it was reported they were not given alcohol and were asked to sit in the room outside the karoke rooms)

·         The CCTV coverage in the premises (which did not cover the karaoke rooms)

·         Why legal advice had not been sought sooner, with 3 visits taking place showing breaches (the licence holder's response was that the earlier occasions had been private birthday parties, and the 3^rd a misunderstanding)

·         Whether  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.