Content

Notification of decision following a Licensing Panel hearing to
determine an application for a
premises licence under section 17 of
the Licensing Act 2003

 

PREMISES: Delmon
Pizza Ltd trading as Domino’s Pizza (“the Premises”)

 

APPLICANT:  Delmon Pizza ltd t/a Domino's Pizza
(registered company number 02652768)

  
TAKE
NOTICE THAT following a hearing before
the Licensing and General Purposes Sub-Committee (the “the
Licensing Panel” or
“Panel”)
 
ON 15
July 2025, the London Borough of
Hounslow, as the relevant Licensing Authority,
 

RESOLVED as follows:

 

That the application for a premises licence for
Domino’s Pizza, 95 Chiswick High Road, Chiswick, W4 2EF be
REJECTED.
 

REASONS:

 

1.          
The Licensing Panel convened in person on 15 July
2025 to determine an application for a premises licence for 95
Chiswick High Road, Chiswick, W4 2EF(“the “Premises”) under the
Licensing Act 2003.  The Premises are
currently licensed and are in an area of residential and commercial
properties.

 

2.          
The application, which was shown as Appendix A to the
Agenda papers, sought to license the Premises for late-night
refreshment from 23:00 to 01:00 every day, and sought an extension
to the opening hours by extending the closing time from 23:00 to
01:00 every day. 

 

3.          
During the consultation process, there were 23
representations received from local
residents opposing the extension of the opening
times.  The concerns were mainly based
on the public nuisance and crime and disorder licensing objectives
and raised issues such as the additional noise from delivery
vehicles, disturbance during nighttime hours from people
congregating outside the Premises, littering, late-night deliveries
from suppliers and waste collections, and delivery drivers
speeding.  A full copy of the
representation and the full wording of the proposed conditions was
set out as Appendix B to the Agenda.

 

4.          
The Police did not submit a representation, however
Appendix C to the Agenda shows conditions proposed by them, which
have been accepted by the Applicant. These proposed conditions
cover the installation and use of a CCTV system, and signage, and
the procedure for reporting cases of serous assault to the
police.
 

 

5.          
At the hearing Mr Ahmed Ali Uzri appeared on behalf of the Applicant, and there
was also one objector, a local resident in attendance.

 

6.          
It was brought to the attention of the Panel that
the Applicant was reluctant to make the application following
discussions between the Applicant and the licensing officer before
the meeting convened. When the meeting convened the Applicant was
asked what the position was and explained that he was unprepared
because the person who completed the application had recently
resigned. The Committee advised him he had the opportunity to
continue to make the application as parties were in attendance and
the Panel could hear the application. The Applicant was content to
take this opportunity and continue with the
Application.  The Licensing Panel
carefully considered all the relevant information
including:
 

·       
Written and oral representations made by all the
parties

·       
The Licensing Act 2003 and the steps
appropriate to promotethe
Licensing Objectives

·       
The guidance issued under section 182 of the
Licensing Act 2003

·       
Hounslow Council’s licensing policy

·       
The Human Rights Act 1998

 

7.          
The Applicant stated that the purpose of extending
the opening hours was to help with sales and they were trying to
make the store as comfortable as possible. He said there may be
objections regarding noise, but they have replaced the petrol bikes
with electric bikes to reduce noise pollution. He also added that
they would look to not have collection orders past 11pm and have
deliveries only after this time as this was safer for
them.  He said the bikes were stored in
a parking bay and all drivers were employed by Domino’s, who
pick up and deliver their orders. The Applicant confirmed they do
not sell alcohol. He also advised they would lock the front door,
and all drivers would be expected to enter from the rear of the
premises from 11pm.

 

8.          
To address the written concerns relating to the
noise emanating from the late-night deliveries and loading,
in particular that the deliveries
arrived between 10pm and midnight, the Panel asked the Applicant
what time their suppliers arrived, but he responded that he did not
know.

 

9.          
The Applicant was also asked to comment on the waste
disposal process, and he said he did not know. The Panel asked
where the drivers waited between deliveries and the Applicant
responded they should wait inside and that there were facilities
for them to remain inside, including toilet facilities in the
premises downstairs. When asked by the Panel about litter clearance
the Applicant said the workers were responsible for clearing up
after their shift, however, this often happened in the morning
before opening hours. The Panel asked what increase in revenue was
anticipated during the extended hours and the Applicant responded
that 60% of the income came from trading on Friday and Saturday.
The Panel asked if the Applicant would consider seeking an
extension only on Friday and Saturday and the Applicant said this
would be considered. The Applicant was asked if there is CCTV in
the Premises and responded that there was. The Panel highlighted
that the CCTV camera was not marked on the plan submitted with the
application.

 

10.      
The Objector in attendance, who is a local resident,
said his concerns were with drivers ignoring the speed limit and
the behaviour of the drivers with smoking outside and urinating
behind the alley of the Premises. The Applicant stated he was not
aware of this and that there were toilet facilities in the
Premises.

 

11.      
The Applicant was not able to address questions
regarding the delivery and supply process, and in the absence of
his knowledge around the process, it is not clear he could fully
address the licensing objective around the prevention of public
nuisance. Although conditions could be applied to address this,
more information from the Applicant around the delivery of the
supplies process would assist the Licensing Panel and demonstrate
that this had all been considered.

 

12.      
The Licensing Authority’s own Statement of
Licensing Policy also states how it considers the issue of public
nuisance at section 9 of the Policy, stating that:

 

“9.1Licensed premises have a significant potential to
adversely impact upon communities through public nuisances that
arise from their operation. This Authority wishes to maintain and
protect the amenity of residents and businesses from the potential
consequence of the operation of a licensed premise whilst balancing
this with the recognition of the valuable cultural, social and
economic importance that such premises
provide.

 

9.2It is the intention of this Authority
to interpret ‘public nuisance’ in its widest
sense, taking into
account such issues as noise, light, odour, litter and
anti-social behaviour, where these matters impact upon those
living, working or otherwise engaged in normal activity in a
particular area.

 

9.5 Applicants will be expected to
demonstrate in their operating schedule that suitable and
sufficient measures have been identified and will be implemented
and maintained to prevent public nuisance, relevant to the
individual style and characteristics of their premises and
events.

 

9.6 When addressing the issue of the
prevention of public nuisance, the applicant must demonstrate to
the licensing authority that those factors, which impact upon the
likelihood of public nuisance, have been
considered.”

 

 

Decision

 

13.      
The Applicant accepted he was not fully prepared to
address some of the questions put to him by the Licensing Panel and
that he may benefit from more time to consider the points relating
to delivery and waste disposal times,
and the processes around that to be in a position to fully address
the licensing objectives, particularly around the prevention of
public nuisance. The applicant was aware that should the
application be rejected on this occasion, there would be further
opportunity for him to make a fresh application in due
course.
 

14.      
Taking all matters into account, the Licensing Panel
has therefore decided to REJECT the application.

 
 

Right to Appeal

 

15.      
Any party aggrieved with the
decision of the Licensing Panel on one or more grounds set
out in
Schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003 may appeal to the local
Magistrate’s Court within 21 days of notification of this
decision.