Agenda and minutes
Venue: The Thornton Room - Ground Floor, West Offices (G039). View directions
Contact: Laura Bootland
No. | Item |
---|---|
To elect a Member to act as Chair of the meeting. Minutes: Resolved: That Councillor Boyce be elected as Chair of the meeting. |
|
Introductions |
|
Declarations of Interest At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:
· any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests · any prejudicial interests or · any disclosable pecuniary interests
which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.
Minutes: At this point in the meeting, Members were asked to declare any personal, prejudicial or pecuniary interests they may have in the business on the agenda. None were declared. |
|
Minutes: Members considered an application for the review of 3 premises licences by PC Mick Wilkinson in respect of Indian Ocean Tandoori, 37 The Green, Acomb, York, The Kings Ransom, 12A King Street York and The Jaipur Spice, 103 Haxby Road, York.
In coming to their decision, the sub-committee took into consideration all of the evidence and submissions that were presented to them and determined their relevance to the licensing objectives. The following were taken into account:
1. The review application form.
2. The Licensing Officer’s report and her comments made at the hearing. She advised that PC Mick Wilkinson, North Yorkshire Police was the review applicant for all 3 premises. Consultation had been carried out correctly. She also advised that there was a typing error at page 41, paragraph 15 of the Report regarding Kings Ranson, which should read “ The premises fall within the cumulative impact area”.
3. The representations by the Review Applicant’s Solicitor and his witnesses at the hearing. The representation by the Review Applicant’s Solicitor and his witnesses at the hearing. It was accepted by the Applicant that a criminal prosecution was not being pursued by the Secretary of State in relation to the 3 investigations, and no criminal proceedings had been brought against Mr Zaman in relation to the employment of illegal workers pursuant to S.21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 in the past. Any such breaches had been dealt with under civil proceedings by way of a financial penalty (s15 of the 2006 Act). Notwithstanding this, the Sub-Committee was asked to consider S.182 Guidance at paragraph 11.27, which advises “...that certain criminal activity ... should be treated particularly seriously ... These are the use of the licensed premises ... for knowingly employing a person who is unlawfully in the UK who cannot lawfully be employed as a result of a condition on that person’s leave to enter;” Paragraph 11.28 states that “ the police .. will use the review procedures effectively to deter such activities and crime ... where reviews arise and the licensing authority determines that the crime prevention objective is being undermined through the premises being used to further crimes, it is expected that revocation of the licence, even in the first instance, should be seriously considered.” It was submitted that the licensing authority could make a finding on the facts that Mr Zaman had knowingly employed people and that criminal activity is taking place on the premises, based on the evidence put forward at the hearing, and that this is affecting the licensing objective of prevention of crime and disorder. It was submitted that as Licence Holder for all premises and as Designated Premises Supervisor of two of the premises, Mr. Zaman should be aware of what is required of him, in terms of checking that employees are legally entitled to work. A representative of the Border Agency spoke to confirm details of the visits to the premises which took place in February 2014 and ... view the full minutes text for item 98. |
|
Minutes: Due to all 3 review applications being by the same review applicant and the premises being operated by the same individual, and the issues being the same across all 3 premises, the decision was taken to consider all 3 applications combined. Please see minute item 98.
|
|
Minutes: Due to all 3 review applications being by the same review applicant and the premises being operated by the same individual, and the issues being the same across all 3 premises, the decision was taken to consider all 3 applications combined. Please see minute item 98.
|