Agenda and minutes

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interest they may have in any matter which is to be considered at this meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Council’s Licensing Officer presented a report in respect of an application for a premises licence submitted by Zim Bar, 20 – 30 London Road, Barking.

This application was due to be heard on 24 April 2012; however, on the day of the meeting, the applicant’s representative requested that matter be rescheduled for four weeks later, on the basis that they required more time to examine the papers. The meeting was cancelled and Board members, responsible authorities and interested parties wishing to attend the meeting were informed.

The applicant was seeking a licence for the supply of alcohol, the provision of late night refreshment, and the provision of some regulated entertainment (music and dance). The times sought for the licensable activities were 11:00 to 01:00 on Monday and Wednesday and 11:00 to 03:30 on Tuesday and Thursday – Sunday.

The matter was before the Board as the Licensing Team had received valid representations opposing the grant of this premises licence from the following:

• The Metropolitan Police

• Environmental Health (Noise)

• Community Safety and Public Protection (Child Protection)

• Eight Local Residents

The Democratic Services Officer stated that she had received two emails from the applicant’s representative; one at 3.47pm with a document attached to it providing commentary on the Police’s representations, and, one at 4.39pm stating that the firm would not be attending the meeting because the Police had sent them further documentation late last week, which they needed more time to analyse.

The Designated Premises Supervisor, Peter Kamau, the Sole Director of Zim Bar, Lawrence Ssendege, and the Manager of Zim Bar were present. The Chair invited them to clarify the situation.

Mr Kamau stated that the applicant wished to seek an adjournment of the matter because the applicant did not have legal representation due to a lack of funds. In response to a question from the Chair, Mr Kamau stated that this was the main reason for seeking the adjournment.

In response to a question from the Chair, Mr Kamau stated that in response to a request from their legal representatives, the Police had sent them further documentation late last week including CAD and CRIS reports, which their representatives needed further time to analyse. This was the secondary reason for the applicant seeking an adjournment.

In response to a question from the Council’s Legal Officer, Kevin Baumber, Counsel for the Metropolitan Police, stated that the papers being referred to were the underpinning documentation for the Police’s representations and did not contain any substantial new information. It was not thought that these papers would serve any further purpose and this is why they were not provided to the Board. They were provided to the applicant only upon request. With regards to the papers being provided to the applicant late last week, the request was made late, considering that the applicant had been granted a four week adjournment, and they were provided in a timely fashion.

The Board adjourned to consider the request for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Licensing Officer is to inform the Board of any appeals made against its recent decisions.

The Council’s Licensing Officer stated that Pot Luck’s appeal against the Board’s decision of 31 January 2012, (that amended the licensing hours and added conditions to the premises licence), which occurred as a result of a review of the premises licence, would be heard by the Magistrates Court in Romford on Thursday 24 May 2012.