The Licensing Sub-Committee of Southwark Council met on Friday 19 January 2024 to consider an urgent application for a summary review of the premises licence for Club 701. As an interim measure, the committee resolved to suspend the licence pending a full review.

Club 701 Licence Suspension

The Licensing Sub-Committee resolved to suspend the premises licence for Club 701, located at the Basement and Ground Floors, 516 Old Kent Road, London SE1 5BA, as an interim step. This decision was made pending the determination of a full review application scheduled for 8 February 2024, in order to promote the licensing objectives.

The application for a summary review was brought by the Metropolitan Police Service under Section 53A of the Licensing Act 2003¹. A Superintendent had certified that, in their opinion, the premises were associated with serious crime, serious disorder, or both, as of 17 January 2024. This led to the application for a summary review of the licence. The specific concern related to an alleged serious incident that occurred between 02:15 and 02:45 hours on 2 January 2024, a time when the premises should have been closed, as detailed in crime report number 3001447/24.

During the hearing, the sub-committee heard evidence from the Metropolitan Police Service in private, as permitted by Regulation 14(2) of The Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2003². This was deemed necessary because no arrests had been made at the time, and premature disclosure of details could jeopardise the ongoing investigation. The police requested the interim suspension of the licence.

The Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) for Club 701 stated that the premises had been open for a ticketed event on the night of 1-2 January 2024, but confirmed there was no Temporary Event Notice (TEN)³ in place for this event. The DPS expressed surprise at the allegation of serious crime, stating they were present that night and it was not busy, with no more than 50 patrons. They claimed the premises closed at 02:30 hours and all patrons had left by 03:00 hours. The DPS was unable to comment further on preventing future incidents as they were not fully aware of the allegations. They also stated they had reviewed CCTV footage and observed nothing untoward, and no complaints had been received. The DPS accepted responsibility for the lack of a TEN, explaining they were unaware the premises was not authorised to open, attributing this to a lack of induction and the complexity of the licence conditions. They believed the premises was permitted to open as 1 January is internationally recognised as a bank holiday.

The sub-committee clarified that while the premises licence allowed for extended hours on New Year's Day morning, it did not permit opening after 05:00 hours on 1 January 2024, nor on 2 January 2024, as stipulated by condition 396 of the premises licence. The DPS acknowledged the event was advertised online and ticketed, but described it as a New Year's Day party intended to run until 02:00-03:00 hours, which conflicted with advertising admission until 04:00 hours. The DPS explained this discrepancy as a promoter thing, stating they did not plan to open that late.

The owner of the premises, who has had a restricted role since 2019 due to condition 840 on the licence, stated they were out of the country on 1 and 2 January 2024. They were only made aware of the police concerns on 18 January and had met with staff, including SIA door staff, none of whom were aware of any incident. They had also reviewed CCTV and found no evidence of serious crime. The owner argued that closing the premises, potentially for months, due to an alleged offence would have a devastating impact on staff and the business.

The sub-committee was satisfied that the premises had been open when not permitted to be, and that serious crime and/or serious disorder had taken place. They noted the premises' history of operating without necessary permissions, including a previous summary review in 2019 following a similar incident. The police also informed the sub-committee of credible information received around 3 January 2024 that members of a gang would be attending the premises and committing serious violence, although the premises did not open voluntarily in response to this.

The sub-committee concluded that the DPS, despite claiming experience, had contradicted themselves and provided a poor explanation for not submitting TENs, demonstrating a lack of full understanding of the premises licence terms. The suspension was deemed necessary and proportionate to prevent crime and disorder, with no other modifications to the licence considered appropriate at this time due to the seriousness of the incident, licence breaches, and the premises' operating history.

There is no right of appeal to a Magistrates' Court against this interim decision. However, the premises licence holder may make representations against the interim steps imposed, which will be heard within 48 hours of receipt. Further representations can only be made if there has been a material change in circumstances.