Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Lee Mason was appointed chair of this hearing.

No interests were declared.

Purpose of Report

For the committee to consider an application for the grant of a new premises licence pursuant to section 18 of the Licensing Act 2003 ("the Act").

The matter has been referred to the committee for determination following receipt of relevant representations from other persons, namely local residents, local traders and councillors.

The Committee is requested to determine the application.

In the Matter of the Licensing Act 2003:

Application for grant of a premise licence - Elegance, 149 Albert Road, Southsea PO4 0JW.

The Committee has carefully considered the application before it for the grant of a premise licence and has also considered the representations made in relation to this application, both made orally and in writing. The Committee has also heard the comments of the applicant's leading counsel and further notes the fact that in addition a number of petitions have been submitted together with a number of written objections running from page 39 of the bundle to page 232.

The Committee have considered the relevant sections of the Portsmouth City Council Licensing Policy.

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 fact that no representations have been made is of significance and the Committee give appropriate weight to that fact. A similar view is given to the fact that none of the other Responsible Authorities have made any representation.  

The above having been said the Committee is engaged by reason of the number of objections correctly received in having to consider the current application. The Committee was impressed by the number and thoughtfulness of the representations and able to conclude that the majority of comments pertained to the licensing objectives of:

·         Prevention of crime and disorder.

·         Prevention of public nuisance.

·         Protection of children from harm.

·         Public safety.

being allegedly engaged. Having looked at the comments there is no evidence to link any incidents to the premises and that the mere "likelihood" of such incidents occurring in the future is not such as to enable the application to be rejected. The Committee also note that parking concerns cannot be taken into consideration in determining this application. 

Additionally there is no evidence to suggest that the applicants' have materially failed to promote any of the relevant licensing objectives indeed the operating schedule shows a high level of consideration to the necessary steps being taken to promote on a continuing basis all of the licensing objectives. 

In considering the application for a grant of a premise licence the Committee is 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 sec182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

1.        The premise will trade from the first floor of the venue with a capacity limited to 100 patrons. It is clear that the applicant has extensive and relevant experience within the licensing trade having run a number of establishments without difficulty.    

2.       The premise is not in an area of special policy or cumulative impact and there is no  ...  view the full decision text for item 24.

The Licensing Sub-committee hearing procedure was followed.

Present:

Peter Baulf, Legal Advisor

Tracy Blair, Legal Advisor

Nickii Humphreys, Licensing Manager

Derek Stone, Principal Licensing Officer

Mr Paul Ojla, Applicant

Mr Philip Kolvin, QC, Barrister for the Applicant

Mr Jon Wallsgrove, Solicitor for the Applicant. 

Mr Adrian Studd, Independent Licensing Consultant on behalf of the Applicant.

Interested parties making deputations

Ms C Storey

Cllr Lee Hunt

Ms C Dacke

Cllr Suzy Horton

Ms H Reed

Cllr S Pitt

Ms C Davies

Ms M Bonner-Janes

Mr M Mitchell

Mr Andrew Pearce

Mr Richard Adair

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked everyone present to introduce themselves. 

The Principal Licensing Officer introduced the report. 

There were no questions from members to the Principal Licensing Officer. 

There were no questions from the applicant to the Principal Licensing Officer. 

In response to questions from the interested parties, the Principal Licensing Officer advised the following:

·         He did not think he was in a position to answer the question as to whether this premises opening until 04:00 would not prevent an increased risk of crime and disorder in the area.  He added that there are many venues open in Albert Road until that time in the morning that do not attract incidents of crime and disorder.

·         There are no other premises in Albert Road that are open until 04:00.  He believed the latest was 02:00 or 03:00. 

·         Currently the only premises with a late night licence in Albert Road was the Gin and Olive which was open until 02:30.  There was only one shop in Albert Road with a late night licence.

·         He was not aware that the licensing policy seeks to move people away from licenced premises quickly after hours so they are not in residential areas at night, and said he would need to double check the policy.  Venues will operate in accordance with conditions and the behaviour of individuals after dispersal is down to the individuals.  

·         He confirmed that there are residential properties around Albert Road.  He was unaware that Central Southsea is the most densely populated ward in Portsmouth. 

Mr Kolvin, QC was then invited to present the applicant's case.  He reminded members that they had received an additional bundle of information which was sent to them the previous week. 

Mr Kolvin wished to start with making four preliminary general remarks about the application:

(1)  Scope - if the premises licence is granted the operation will be highly regulated and subject to 14 conditions on the premises licence which have been previously agreed by the police and other responsible authorities.

(2)  It would also be subject to the mandatory licensing conditions.

(3)  It would also be subject to the 61 conditions on SEV licences set out on page 306 which reflects Portsmouth's thorough code to ensure the premises operates discreetly and without harm

(4)  It would also be subject to the 4 planning conditions set out on page 43 of the applicant's bundle.

The Committee would further be entitled  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

Purpose of report

The purpose of this report is for the Committee to determine an application for the grant of a sexual entertainment venue licence in respect of the premises situated at 149 Albert Road, Southsea, Portsmouth, PO4 0JW and known by the name of Elegance. The application has been submitted by Mr Jaspal Singh Ojla.

RECOMMENDED

That the Committee determine the application for the grant of a sexual entertainment venue licence in respect of the premises situated at 149 Albert Road, Southsea, Portsmouth, PO4 0JW and to be known by the name of Elegance.

In the Matter of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982

Licensing of Sex Establishments- Sexual Entertainment Venue.

Application for the grant of a licence-Mr Jaspal Singh Ojla - Elegance 149 Albert Road Southsea PO4 0JW.

The Committee have considered all written material placed before them along with the submissions made by leading counsel retained by the applicant together with all comments made by the Licensing Authority and the individual objectors to the application. The Committee has looked at the specific objections from page 317 of the bundle to page 415. 

Portsmouth City Council adopted Schedule 3 of the LG (MP) 1982 as amended by the Policing and Crime Act 2009 so that as an Authority, PCC could regulate Sexual Entertainment Venues- this decision was made by PCC on the 22^nd of March 2011.

Portsmouth City Council following consultation between 1^st March 2012 and 12^th April 2012 adopted the Sex Establishment Licensing Policy in October 2012. 

This Committee is asked to determine the application 23 January 2018.

Each application should be decided upon its own merit and subject to the individual circumstances of the case.

The application is limited to the upstairs of the relevant premise. Details of the application have been advertised and the appropriate responses sought from: the Chief Officer of Police, Chief Fire Officer along with other consultees as stated at page 241 of the bundle. No objections have been raised by these agencies.

The Committee is aware that the applicant holds 2 SEV licences, one at Surrey Street and the other being at Granada Road Southsea .The current application is for a new licence at the above premise, that said the applicant concedes that he will surrender his current licence at Granada Road- this offer being contingent upon success of the current application.

The Act sets out the basis for refusal of an application based upon either mandatory  grounds being engaged or discretionary grounds.

It is common ground and clear that the application cannot be rejected upon engagement of any of the applicable mandatory grounds.

The Committee is therefore engaged in considering the application upon merit having due regard to the following:

·           The discretionary statutory grounds for refusal.

·           The Portsmouth City Council SEV policy.

·           The Statutory Guidance.

·           The Human Rights Act 1998.

The Committee is engaged in considering whether there is any discretionary basis to refuse the application. The Committee is required to consider the current PCC policy paying regard to paragraph 7.3 to 7.17. Having considered all the written evidence and the objections from those attending today the Committee make the following observations using the policy guidance:

· Unsuitability of the applicant- looking at 7.3 to 7.6 of the policy:

o    The Committee could not find that there were any grounds upon which the suitability of the applicant could be questioned.  It is clear and having regard to the fact that none of the responsible authorities have made representation that the premises owned by the applicant are run on a professional basis and  ...  view the full decision text for item 25.

The Licensing Sub-committee hearing procedure was followed.

Present:

Peter Baulf, Legal Advisor

Tracy Blair, Legal Advisor

Nickii Humphreys, Licensing Manager

Derek Stone, Licensing Officer

Mr Paul Ojla, Applicant

Mr Philip Kolvin, QC for the Applicant

Mr Jon Wallsgrove, Solicitor for the Applicant. 

Mr Adrian Studd, expert witness on behalf of the Applicant.

Interested parties making deputations

Ms C Storey

Cllr Lee Hunt

Ms C Dacke

Cllr Suzy Horton

Ms H Reed

Cllr S Pitt

Ms C Davies

Ms M Bonner-Janes

Mr M Mitchell

Mr Andrew Pearce

Mr Richard Adair

The Licensing Manager introduced the report. 

There were no questions from members to the Licensing Manager.   

There were no questions from the applicant to the Licensing Manager.

In response to questions from the interested parties, the Licensing Manager advised the following:

·         With regard to paragraph 2.2 of the policy, officers cannot give information and will refer applicants to the policy. 

·         The application was received in January 2018 and the current policy applies.

Applicant's case

Mr Kolvin said that he had previously made some preliminary submissions and said they would apply to both applications.  Mr Studd spoke earlier as a witness so he will not call Mr Studd again. 

He explained that if the licence is granted Mr Ojla's intention is to surrender the licence at Granada Road.  Any SEV licence will be granted for a maximum period of one year.  SEVs were formerly operated as members clubs and their status in licensing regulation was not clear.  They did not need planning permission.  When the Licensing Act was introduced they were treated as regular entertainment and in 2009 Parliament looked at the issues and there was considerable debate.  Parliament decided that sexual entertainment was a lawful activity and permitted authorities to regulate it.  The transformation of the treatment for SEVs has been salutary as council's have been free to adopt standard conditions.  Where venues exist they must do so without impact to the environment. 

Previously SEVs used to be 'seedy' shop fronts however now there is never a view of the inside from outside which reduced the environmental impact.  The applicant has offered the standard 61 conditions and gives assurance that if permitted to operate he must do lawfully and respectfully.  However, if he is not as good as his word he will find himself in difficulties in 12 months' time when it comes back to committee to review performance.  The committee has broad discretion to add more conditions that think proportionate to meet any further concerns. 

The context of grounds of refusal presumption is to grant there needs to be a specific reason to refuse.  None of the mandatory grounds for refusal are relevant as confirmed by the Licensing Manager.    

With regards to the discretionary grounds:

(1)  The suitability of Mr Ojla - Mr Ojla is a highly experienced businessman in the city and a personal licence holder who has run two compliant SEVS in the city for many years. There are no grounds to suggest he is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.