Agenda and minutes

Licensing Act 2003 Sub-Committee - Thursday, 20th September 2012 10.00 am

modern.gov app available
View upcoming public committee documents on your iPad, Android Device or Blackberry Playbook with the free modern.gov app.

Venue: Council Chamber

Contact: Dianne Scambler  Email: dianne.scambler@chorley.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

12.LAS.19

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

In the absence of Councillor Matthew Crow, Councillor Adrian Lowe sat on the Sub Committee.

12.LAS.20

Declarations of Any Interests

Minutes:

No declarations were received.

12.LAS.21

Application for Premises licence under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003: Supanews pdf icon PDF 425 KB

Report of the Director of People and Places (enclosed)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Licensing Sub Committee considered the application for the granting of a premises licence, at premises in Chorley in light of representations made by Lancashire Constabulary in relation to the application.

 

The Sub Committee heard the application in the absence of the applicant and voiced their disappointment at his non-attendance; however they carefully considered his application, taking into account the written and verbal representations from all parties, including an email of 19 September 2012 from the applicant.

 

The Sub Committee also considered guidance issued under Section 4 of the Licensing Act 2003, its Statement of Licensing Policy and the amended guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of the Act, in particular those paragraphs referred to in the Licensing Officers report, the Licensing objectives and the Human Rights Act implications including Article 6, Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol.

 

On that basis the Sub Committee:

 

RESOLVED to refuse the application as it undermines the prevention of crime and disorder and protection of children from harm licensing objectives.

 

The Sub Committee gave due regard to the lack of measures in place to satisfy the licensing objectives and determined the refusal of the licence was necessary and proportionate in light of all the evidence and representations.