The Licensing (2003 Act) Sub-Committee of Newham Council met on Thursday 26 January 2012 to consider an application for a new premises licence for Nisa Extra, located at 95-99 Barking Road, E16. The application was refused by the committee.

Nisa Extra, 95-99 Barking Road, E16

The Sub-Committee refused the application for a new premises licence for Nisa Extra, located at 95-99 Barking Road, E16. The application was for the sale of alcohol for off-premises consumption, with proposed opening hours of 08:00 to 02:30 Monday to Saturday and 08:00 to 24:00 on Sundays, with the premises open 24 hours a day.

Representations were received from several responsible authorities, including the Metropolitan Police, the Council's Trading Standards team, the Noise and Nuisance unit, and the Planning unit. All of these bodies objected to the application on various grounds related to the licensing objectives.

The Metropolitan Police objected on the grounds of the prevention of crime and disorder and public nuisance, citing past issues with the premises including failure to provide CCTV footage and the sale of non-duty paid and counterfeit alcohol. They also noted the premises' location in an area frequented by street drinkers.

The Trading Standards team opposed the application on the grounds of the protection of children from harm and the prevention of crime and disorder. They raised concerns about staff training and the ability of staff to operate the proposed Challenge 25 policy, as well as the ongoing issues with counterfeit alcohol and sales outside permitted hours.

The Noise and Nuisance unit objected on the grounds of public nuisance, expressing concern that the proposed late opening hours could disturb residents living above and in the vicinity of the premises due to noise from customers and vehicles.

The Planning unit also objected on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance, highlighting that the premises are located in a mixed commercial and residential building and that the proposed late hours could lead to disturbances for residents. They suggested that restricting opening hours to 08:00 to 23:00 would be more acceptable.

The Sub-Committee noted that the premises are located within a Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ)¹, and that there is a presumption to refuse applications within such zones unless the applicant can demonstrate that they will not add to existing problems. The committee concluded that the applicant, Mr Irfan Koca, had failed to demonstrate in his operating schedule that the application would not exacerbate existing issues in the area. Specific concerns were raised about the lack of detail regarding staff training and how noise and nuisance outside the premises, particularly in the early hours, would be addressed. Given the history of the premises and the area, the Sub-Committee felt they had no alternative but to refuse the application.