Agenda item

The applicant has applied for a new Premise Licence for Canterbury St Food Centre & Supermarket, 162-164 Canterbury Street, Gillingham, Kent, ME7 5UB.

All responsible authorities have been consulted in line with the Licensing Act.

Representations have been received from the Public Health team, Kent Police and a member of public. No agreements have been reached.

Discussion:

The Chairperson explained the process that the hearing would follow as outlined on page 4 of the agenda.

The Licensing Officer informed the Panel that the applicant had applied for a new Premise Licence for Canterbury St Food Centre and Supermarket, 162-164 Canterbury Street, Gillingham, Kent, ME7 5UB.  All responsible authorities had been consulted in line with the Licensing Act 2003 and representations had been received from Public Health, Kent Police and a member of the public.  These documents could be found in Appendix B, C and D of the report and in the supplementary agenda no 1.

As the applicant was unavailable and did not attend the hearing due to another meeting with a supplier, the Prosecutions, Litigation and Licensing Lawyer asked the agent, the applicant’s representative, if he had received authorisation from the applicant to speak on his behalf and that he understood the objectives of the Licensing Hearing Panel.  The agent confirmed that he was there as the applicant’s representative and understood the objectives of the Licensing Hearing Panel.

The Chairperson invited the applicant’s representative to speak in support of their application.  The agent explained that the applicant understood the licensing objectives and had put in place internal and external controls with regards to the selling of alcohol.  He clarified that the applicant adhered to the Challenge 25 policy and identification checks were requested and a regular  training programme would be introduced.  

The agent said that they would limit the purchase of alcohol for younger people and people that appeared to be drunk, and they would not sell alcohol that was above 5% alcohol by volume (ABV) for beer and 10% ABV for wine. 

The Chairperson asked the objectors if they had questions for the applicant, the Public Health representative asked why in the application form, there was no mention of the Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) which was readily available on the Medway Council website.  The agent said the applicant had read and understood the CIP, although could not show any understanding of the issues set out in the policy.  

The Panel questioned the agent and asked what the four licensing objectives were and what would the applicant do to prevent these objectives, the agent was unable to respond.

The agent confirmed that the applicant had two more stores in North London, however, had no other businesses in Medway.  He explained that at least six people would be employed to work in the shop during the opening hours, which were 6am to midnight, Monday to Sunday.

The objectors were then given the opportunity to express their concerns.  Kent Police had submitted objections to all four of the licensing objectives as set out on page 37 to 42 in the agenda.

Public Health had submitted objections to two of the licensing objectives as set out on page 27 to 35 in the agenda.

The Panel asked whether additional premises selling alcohol would add to the litter problems within the area, the Public Health representative said she considered it would, although the products were not marked so there would be no way of saying where the products were actually purchased but an additional off-license would definitely add to these problems.

The Panel asked Kent Police whether they had been contacted by the applicant, whilst completing the application form, and PC Squires confirmed they had received no contact from him.

In summing up, the agent highlighted that the applicant would provide additional training to staff on selling alcohol, during peak times additional security could be provided and the operating times could be changed to reduce the hours, if the Panel agreed to this condition.

The Public Health representative made Members aware of Policy 10 from the Statement of Licensing Policy which is on page 31 of the agenda which sets out the expectations of the Licensing Authority when determining applications for off licensed premises.

Public Health and Kent Police were also concerned that the application form did not mention the CIP, nor did it show any understanding of the issues set out in the policy that were particular to this area, or how the applicant intended to ensure the sale of alcohol would not add to these issues.  There were no measures contained within the operating schedule which would ensure that alcohol sold from the premises would not add to the issues detailed above, therefore, the application was not ‘exceptional’ as required in the Statement of Licensing Policy.

With the exception of the Legal Representative and the Democratic Services Officer, all present left the room during the Panel’s deliberations, returning to hear the Panel’s decision.

Decision:

The Panel had carefully considered the written application and objections and had listened to all the oral submissions from the applicant and objectors in relation to the premises licence.

The premises is located within the Gillingham Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) area which covered Gillingham High St and the surrounding area.

A Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) was also in force within the area of the premises.

Therefore, in accordance with Medway Council Licensing Policy, exceptional circumstance must be shown to grant a new premise licence and for the licensing objectives to be upheld.  The application had not demonstrated any relevant information and suitable submissions as to upholding the four licensing objectives.

The Licensing Hearing Panel had unanimously decided to refuse the application for a premises licence as no exceptional circumstances and suitable conditions had not been shown to uphold the licensing objectives.