The Kensington and Chelsea Licensing Sub-Committee convened to discuss objections from environmental health officers to a temporary event notice (TEN) submitted by Miss Ann Maher of the Pig & Whistle pub. The committee ultimately decided to issue a counter notice, effectively denying permission for the licensable activities requested in the TEN.

Pig & Whistle Temporary Event Notice

The main item under consideration was a temporary event notice submitted by Miss Ann Maher for the Pig & Whistle, located at 92-94 Bramley Road. The application sought permission for the sale of alcohol, both on and off the premises, and the provision of regulated entertainment, including live music, in the pub's garden during the Notting Hill Carnival weekend of 24 and 25 August 2025. The hours requested were midday to 7pm on both days.

Paul Fellon from the council's licensing team, explained that the application had received an objection from Philip Richardson of the Environmental Health Noise and Nuisance Team, based on concerns about public nuisance and public safety.

Miss Maher explained that she was upset by the objection, stating that the area is generally noisy during the carnival and that the event would simply provide entertainment in the garden. She also mentioned a recent noise complaint and an incident involving a disruptive customer, but asserted that the pub was taking appropriate measures to address these issues.

Councillor Lucy Knight asked about noise complaints and how the applicant would reassure the council, and Philip Richardson, that the event would not cause a nuisance. Miss Maher responded that the area is generally noisy during the carnival, and that many local residents go away during that time.

Councillor Nair asked about public safety measures for the expected 150 attendees each day. Miss Maher stated that there would be five to six staff members, including doormen, and that the event would be ticket-only with controlled entry and exit points.

The committee reviewed a map of the area (page 31 of the Public Reports Pack) to understand the layout of the pub and the surrounding area. Concerns were raised about the potential for noise disturbance to nearby residents, particularly those in Bramley House, and the safety of patrons moving between the pub and the main carnival area.

Noise and Nuisance Objection

Philip Richardson presented the Environmental Health Noise and Nuisance Team's objection, citing a significant history of involvement with the premises due to numerous complaints about loud music and amplified voices. He referenced an abatement notice served in February 2024, fixed penalty notices issued for breaches of the notice, and a recent review of the premises licence.

On the 21st of June 2025, at 19.40 hours, officers responded to a complaint and witnessed loud amplified music emanating from the premises. This disturbance was deemed excessive and unreasonable, constituting a further statutory nuisance and in breach of the abatement notice dated 13th of February 2024. Accordingly, a prosecution report has been prepared and will be submitted to the council's directors of environmental health and legal services for consideration of whether legal proceedings should be initiated in the magistrate's court for breach of the abatement notice.

Mr. Richardson stated that the department lacked confidence in the management's ability to operate the premises without causing a nuisance, even with the installation of a noise limiter¹. He clarified that a recent noise complaint came from a different resident than the one Miss Maher believed was the primary source of complaints.

Councillor Knight asked about the RBKC sound monitoring system and whether it could provide reassurance if the licence were granted. Mr. Richardson clarified that the noise limiter was installed by the applicants, not the council, and that a nuisance had been witnessed even after its installation. He stated that he had previously recommended that music be limited to internal areas only, but the applicants did not agree.

Councillor Nair questioned whether, given the history of issues at the premises, the environmental health team lacked confidence that the event could proceed smoothly without disturbing residents. Mr. Richardson confirmed that this was the case.

Legal Considerations

The council's legal officer clarified that the committee had to consider whether the event would undermine the licensing objectives, including the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of public safety. She explained that even if the noise levels did not constitute a statutory nuisance², the committee could still consider whether they would cause a lower level of nuisance that would be unacceptable in the context of the licensing objectives.

Decision

After a private deliberation, Councillor Burns announced that the committee had decided to issue a counter notice under Section 105 of the Licensing Act 2003, meaning that permission for the licensable activities requested in the temporary event notice had not been approved.