The Licensing Act 2003¹ subcommittee of Newham Council met to review the premises licence for Stratford Food and Wine, located at 7 Church Street, Stratford, London E15 3HU, following an application by the council's licensing authority. The committee decided to modify the licence with additional conditions, which will be detailed in a decision letter sent to the applicant within five working days. The applicant, responsible authorities, and interested parties have the right to appeal this decision at the Magistrates Court within 21 days.

Review of Premises Licence for Stratford Food and Wine

The main item under consideration was the review of the premises licence for Stratford Food and Wine, initiated by the council's licensing authority due to concerns about the business's impact on the four licensing objectives²: the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance, and the protection of children from harm.

Grounds for Review

The review application, included as Appendix A in the public reports pack, was based on the following concerns:

• Public Safety: Alleged continued sales of alcohol to intoxicated customers, sales to individuals involved in fights outside the premises, and sales to people urinating in public.
• Protection of Children from Harm: Serving alcohol to street drinkers who had been fighting.
• Prevention of Public Nuisance: Attracting street drinkers who litter and cause disturbances outside the shop, deterring other members of the public.
• Prevention of Crime and Disorder: Selling alcohol to street drinkers despite warnings, including those who had been involved in violent incidents.

Evidence and Representations

Licensing Enforcement Officer Shane Passfield presented evidence, including CCTV footage, photographs, and statements, to support the review application. He detailed visits to the premises and observations of street drinking, littering, and anti-social behaviour in the vicinity. Shane Passfield stated that on 28 November 2024, he had advised a member of staff known as 'Ozzy' to stop stocking drinks attractive to street drinkers. On a further visit on 5 December 2024, Shane Passfield spoke with the licence holder, Ms Yazgi Sakinci, who declined to remove certain products, stating they were her main source of income since a Tesco store had opened nearby.

Shane Passfield also described an incident on 3 July 2025, captured on CCTV, where a group of street drinkers outside the shop were seen purchasing alcohol, fighting, smoking drugs, urinating in public, and littering. He noted that shop staff and the licence holder were present while these activities occurred.

Two emails supporting the premises were received by the licensing team, included as Appendix B in the public reports pack.

Licence Holder's Response

Robert Sutherland, representing the licence holder, argued that the evidence presented was insufficient to justify the imposition of conditions. He stated that Ms Sakinci's experience was that other shops in the area, particularly the Price Cutter, sold similar high-strength items. He also pointed out that it is not illegal to drink in the street unless a person is causing a nuisance or disorder.

Robert Sutherland highlighted that the only evidence from local people consisted of two letters supporting the premises, and a statement from a customer who identified as a local resident, not a transient drinker . He also argued that the council should focus on enforcing the Public Space Protection Order³ (PSPO) rather than imposing restrictions on the shop.

Ms Sakinci, with assistance from an interpreter, explained that she had offered to work with Shane Passfield to address the issues. She also mentioned that she and her sister regularly clean the area around the shop.

Proposed Conditions

Shane Passfield proposed several conditions to be added to the licence, including:

• A cap on the alcohol volume of beers, lagers, stouts, and ciders sold at the premises (5.5%).
• A minimum bottle size for spirits (35cl).
• Labelling all alcohol products with the shop's name and address.
• Maintaining a refusals book with detailed information about attempted purchases of age-restricted products.

Robert Sutherland opposed the conditions relating to alcohol percentage and bottle size, arguing they were disproportionate and would unfairly disadvantage the business. He suggested that if the committee were minded to impose such conditions, they should mirror those of other premises in the area (6.5% ABV) and allow the sale of 20cl miniature bottles of spirits.

Robert Sutherland offered alternative conditions, including maintaining a refusals book, upgrading the CCTV system, operating a Challenge 25 policy⁴, and ensuring a personal licence holder is present at all times when alcohol is sold.

CCTV Evidence

The committee viewed CCTV footage presented by Shane Passfield, as well as footage submitted by Robert Sutherland, to support their respective arguments. The council's CCTV showed street drinkers outside the premises, while the licence holder's CCTV showed instances of refused sales and customers purchasing alcohol at a Tesco store after being refused service at Stratford Food and Wine.

Committee Decision

After adjourning to deliberate in private, the committee decided to modify the licence with additional conditions. The specific details of these conditions will be provided in a written decision letter sent to the applicant within five working days.