Subscribe to updates
You'll receive weekly summaries about Tower Hamlets Council every week.
If you have any requests or comments please let us know at community@opencouncil.network. We can also provide custom updates on particular topics across councils.
Licensing Committee - Thursday, 18th March, 2021 5.30 p.m.
March 18, 2021 Licensing Committee View on council website Watch video of meeting Read transcript (Professional subscription required)Summary
Open Council Network is an independent organisation. We report on Tower Hamlets and are not the council. About us
The Licensing Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Thursday 18 March 2021 to discuss the public consultation on cumulative impact policies and to receive an update on prosecutions and appeals. The committee agreed to note the report on prosecutions and appeals, and to note the report on the cumulative impact policy consultation.
Public Consultation on Cumulative Impact Policies
The committee received a report on the public consultation regarding the council's cumulative impact policies (CIZs) for Brick Lane and Bethnal Green. These policies, which are reviewed every three years, aim to manage the density of licensed premises in specific areas to prevent crime, disorder, and public nuisance. The consultation, which ran from January 28 to April 22, 2021, sought views on whether to retain both CIZs, retain one, or remove both.
Tom Lewis, Safety and Licensing Team Leader, explained that the Brick Lane CIZ has been in place for approximately seven years, while the Bethnal Green CIZ has been in place for about two years. He presented data indicating that while crime and disorder figures in Brick Lane have fluctuated, they remain lower than before the CIZ was introduced. Complaints to noise and licensing teams have remained relatively static or decreased in Brick Lane, though Spitalfields and Banglatown wards, where the CIZ is located, still receive a high number of complaints. The number of new and variation licence applications granted in Brick Lane has also decreased. In Bethnal Green, incidents have increased since the CIZ was introduced, but complaints to noise and licensing teams have reduced. Weavers and St. Peter's Wards, where the Bethnal Green CIZ is located, also consistently receive higher complaints. The number of licence applications granted in Bethnal Green has remained fairly static.
Councillors raised concerns about the potential impact of removing CIZs to support businesses recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic. Tom Lewis clarified that any application with a representation would still be considered by the committee on its own merits. He also noted that other authorities have removed their CIZs with the intention of potentially reintroducing them later, but this would require a new consultation process. Councillor David Edgar suggested that future reports should provide more detail on the legislative basis for CIZs, an assessment of businesses that have closed during the pandemic, and an indication of the time required to reintroduce a CIZ if it were removed.
The committee agreed to note the report. The final decision on the cumulative impact policies will be made by Full Council following further consideration by Cabinet.
Update on Prosecutions and Appeals
Ladi Lapite, Principal Enforcement Lawyer, presented an update on licensing-related prosecutions and appeals concluded during Quarter 4 of 2019-2020 and Quarters 1 to 3 of 2020-2021. The report detailed successful prosecutions against businesses for breaches of licensing activity and conditions, including fines and costs awarded to the council. For example, Mohamed Farouk Qureshi of Food Giant Express was fined £500 for a breach of licensing activity, and Shams Udin of Monsoon Restaurant faced a defence cost order of £4,100 after a no-case-to-answer submission. Fountain Beauty and Wellness Limited was fined £880 for a breach of special treatment licence conditions.
The report also covered appeals against licensing decisions. Tanium Superstore appealed against a licence revocation, which was dismissed, with costs awarded to the council. Sushanta Gupta also appealed against a decision to refuse a variation of their premises licence, which was also dismissed.
Councillor David Edgar noted the council's success rate in these cases, with all but one prosecution being successful. He inquired about the number of cases that might have been heard if the courts had been operating at full capacity, estimating that around 20 prosecutions and appeals might have been concluded. Ladi Lapite explained that court backlogs due to the pandemic have led to adjournments, with many cases now being listed for later in the year.
The committee agreed to note the update on prosecutions and appeals.
Attendees
Topics
Meeting Documents
Additional Documents