Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chairman introduced the parties and explained the procedure to be followed. The Hearing Regulations 2005 stated that the Authority must allow parties an equal period of time in which to present their evidence. It was agreed that the maximum time for each presentation be ten minutes.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report, and highlighted background information and representations received.

There were no questions for the Licensing Enforcement Officer.

Sergeant S Moore presented the application for review as detailed within the report. He explained that the designated premises supervisor had now left and the premises had been closed until further notice. He stated that proposed conditions (a) and (d) within the application were no longer relevant as the designated premises supervisor was no longer at the premises. Sergeant Moore reported that he had assumed that the designated premises supervisor would inform Punch Taverns of the failed test purchases but unfortunately that did not happen. He stated that in the future the police authority would inform both the premises licence holder and the designated premises supervisor of any issues if it is not the same person.

Mr J Coen, on behalf of the premises licence holder, then presented his case. He explained that Punch Taverns operated on a tenants leasing basis and that the tenants worked as self employed people not as employees of Punch Taverns. He stated that during an 18 month period, six test purchase operations were conducted and the Moira Arms failed three of them. None of the sales were made by the designated premises supervisor. He also stated that the Challenge 21 Policy was in operation during the failed test purchases and posters were clearly displayed on the premises.

Mr Coen proposed an alteration to condition (c) as detailed within the report. He asked for the wording to be altered so that instead of the condition referring to the 'licensee'
adopting the Challenge 21 Policy, it is replaced with 'designated premises supervisor'.

In response to questions from Members, Mr Coen stated the following:

- The premises had been closed for the past 2 weeks and the intention was to re-let the premises as soon as possible.

- It would take a few weeks for a new tenant to be put in place but interest had been shown in the premises.

- Punch Taverns did not supervise the designated premises supervisors as they operate as self employed businesses. There was a link between the tenants and Punch Taverns as regular visits to the premises were made.

All parties declined the opportunity to give a closing speech.

At 7.00pm the Sub Committee adjourned to consider its decision and re-convened at 7.37pm.

The Legal Advisor read out the Members decision, findings of fact and the reasons for the decision.