MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
LICENSING ACT 2003 SUB COMMITTEE
Minutes of the meeting held on Monday 13 January 2020
Present: |
Councillor Springett (Chairman), and Councillors B Hinder and Joy |
11. Apologies for Absence
There
were no apologies for absence.
12. Notification of Substitute Members
It was
noted that there were no Substitute Members.
13. Notification of Visiting Members
It was
noted that there were no Visiting Members.
14. Election of Chairman
RESOLVED: That Councillor Springett be
elected Chairman for the duration of the meeting.
15. Urgent Items
There were no urgent items.
16. Disclosures by Members and Officers
There
were no disclosures by Members or Officers.
17. Disclosures of Lobbying
There were no disclosures of lobbying.
18. Exempt Items
RESOLVED: That the items on the agenda be
taken in public as proposed.
19. Application for a premises licence under the Licensing Act 2003 for 87 - 88 Bank Street, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 1SD
The Chairman requested that all those persons participating in the hearing identified themselves as follows: -
Chairman – Councillor Springett
Committee Member – Councillor B Hinder
Committee Member – Councillor Joy
Legal Advisor – Mr Robin Harris
Democratic Services Officer – Mrs Caroline Matthews and Miss Oliviya Parfitt who was in attendance as a training exercise
Applicant – Century Buildings (Rochester) Limited
Representing the Applicant – Mr Steven Ross Hutchins
Other parties – Mr Robert Baker and Ms Louisa Beddoes
All parties confirmed that they were aware of the Sub-Committee hearing procedure and that each party had received a copy of the hearing procedure document.
The Chairman
explained that:
·
The Sub-Committee would allow all parties to put their case
fully and make full submissions within a reasonable
timeframe.
·
The procedure would take the form of a discussion led by the
Sub Committee and they would usually permit cross
examination conducted within a reasonable timeframe.
·
Any persons attending the hearing who behaved in a
disruptive manner may be directed to leave the hearing by the
Sub Committee (including temporarily) and thereafter the
person may submit to the Sub-Committee in writing any
information which the person would have been entitled to give
orally had the person not been required to leave the hearing.
The Sub-Committee confirmed that they had pre-read all the papers and any other documents contained in the report regarding the hearing.
The Chairman enquired whether any draft conditions had been agreed between the applicant and other parties from which there had been 1 objection.
Other parties confirmed to the Chairman that they wished to formally withdraw their objection. This was due to a discussion between themselves and the applicant, in the presence of the Legal advisor, prior to the meeting. During this discussion, the consequences of a Shadow License, as applied for, was explained and the other parties’ concerns mitigated.
The Chairman asked the Legal Advisor that the committee would still need to determine the licensing application.
The Chairman invited any questions or statements from both parties.
The applicant’s representative stated that there was none.
The objectors thanked the applicant for explaining the implications of applying for a shadow licence, as stated above, prior to the meeting.
The Chairman then invited questions from Members of which there were none.
The Chairman confirmed that the Sub-Committee would approve the Shadow Licence application. It was noted that the Applicant’s Representative would receive the Notice in writing, within 5 working days from the date of the meeting.
The Chairman stated that there was a Right of Appeal within 21 days of receiving the written answer to the licence application.
The Meeting concluded at 10:50am.