1. Apologies for
Absence
|
There were no apologies for
absence received.
|
2. Declarations of
Interest
|
There were no declarations of
interest.
|
3. Application
|
Review of Premises Licence
– Coco, 11-13 Broadway, Peterborough, PE1 1SQ
|
(i)
Application Reference
|
MAU 064353
|
(ii)
Sub- Committee Members Present
|
Councillor Thacker
(Chairman)
Councillor Peach
Councillor Saltmarsh
|
(iii)
Officers Present
|
Darren Dolby, Regulatory
Officer – Licensing
Colin Miles, Lawyer –
Legal Advisor to the Sub-Committee
Gemma George, Senior Governance
Officer – Clerk to the Sub-Committee
|
(iv)
Applicant:
|
Cambridgeshire
Constabulary
|
(v)
Nature of Application
|
Application Type
Review of existing premises
licence
Summary of Review
Application
The summary review had regard
to an incident of serious disorder occurring on the 21 May 2012,
involving a number of males involved in serious disorder both
inside and outside the premises. Two of the males had been
severally beaten and one was currently (as of 28/5/12) still in a
coma at Addenbrookes Hospital. Five males have been charged in
connection with the disorder and assaults. Cambridgeshire Constabulary were concerned that
further incidents of serious disorder would continue to take place
during the appeal period and recommended that the premises licence
should be suspended as an interim step.
|
(vi)
Licensing Objectives Under Which Representations
Were Made
|
·
The Prevention of Crime and Disorder
·
The Prevention of Public Nuisance
|
(vii)
Parties/Representatives and witnesses
present
|
Applicant / Responsible Authority
PC Grahame Robinson, who
presented the case on behalf of Cambridgeshire
Constabulary.
Sgt. Saunders And PCSO
Constanti were also in attendance, however they did not wish to
speak.
Licensee / Representative
Mr Arfan Araf, the Licensee was
in attendance and was represented by Mr Proctor.
|
(viii)
Pre-hearing considerations and any decisions taken
by the sub-committee relating to ancillary matters
|
Applicant / Responsible Authority
PC Grahame Robinson,
Cambridgeshire Constabulary, requested that two additional
documents be submitted as evidence for consideration by the
Sub-Committee. These were in relation to a recent visit undertaken
at the premises. The meeting was adjourned for half an hour to
allow the Sub-Committee time to consider this request.
The Sub-Committee
determined that the additional evidence
was not to be submitted for consideration.
Licensee / Representative
Mr Proctor, representative for
the Licensee, had requested that a document outlining the
representations on behalf of Mr Araf be permitted for circulation
to all parties.
The Sub-Committee
determined that this document was to be
permitted for circulation to all parties.
Upon commencement of the
hearing, Mr Proctor sought clarification from the Legal Officer
that the documents requested for inclusion into evidence by
Cambridgeshire Constabulary had not been taken into consideration
by the Sub-Committee. The Legal Officer confirmed that they had
been disregarded.
|
(ix)
Oral Representations
|
Prior to submissions being
heard, the Legal Officer sought confirmation from both parties that
they were content that the evidence presented at the Expedited
Review, held on 29 May 2012, with regards to the serious incident
of assault outside the premises on 16 May, had been addressed in
substantial detail previously and did not need to be revisited. For
further ...
view the full minutes text for item 3.
|