Agenda and minutes

Licensing Sub-Committee - Friday 4 February 2022 2.00 pm

Contact: Julia Skinner, Democratic Services,  020 7926 0147, Email:

No. Item


Election of Chair


    MOVED by Councillor Linda Bray, SECONDED by Councillor Becca Thackray


    RESOLVED: That Councillor Fred Cowell be elected Chair for the meeting.




Declaration of Pecuniary Interests

Under Standing Order 4.4, where any councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.




There were none.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 188 KB

    To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 13 January 2022 as a correct record of the proceedings.


Licensing Applications for the Grant / Review of a Premises Licence pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Strategic Director of Residents Services

Contact: Bina Patel, Licensing Manager, 0207 926 4103



53 Carnac Street London SE27 9RR (Gipsy Hill Ward) pdf icon PDF 393 KB

    Additional documents:


    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 1, 3, 4 and 8 of the Statement of Licensing Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were set out in paragraph 6 of the report on pages 20 and 21.


    In response to questions from Members, Mr Ola Owojori Licensing Officer confirmed:


    ·           The applicant was seeking authorisation for the sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises.

    ·           The opening hours were proposed as Monday to Sunday from 06:00 to 23:59.

    ·           One representation had been received against the application from the Licensing Authority.

    ·           Mr Suresh Kanapathi, representing the applicant, was in attendance.

    ·           Ms Pamela Riley, representing the Licensing Authority, was in attendance.

    ·           The application could be found on pages 22 to 32 of the reports pack.

    ·           The representation could be found on pages 35 to 39 of the reports pack.



    Presentation by the Applicant


    Mr Shuresh Kanapathi, representing the applicant, informed the Sub-Committee that:


    ·           The applicant was seeking a departure from policy hours that Lambeth had for a premises of this type in this location.

    ·           The existing premises license had an opening hour of 09:00, but the applicant applied for an opening hour of 06:00 as this was a small shop outside of the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ), with one other shop approximately 300 yards away.

    ·           Customers were primarily regulars and local residents.

    ·           The applicant agreed to an opening hour of 08:00 and terminal hour of 23:00.


    In response to questions from Members, Mr Shuresh Kanapathi confirmed:


    ·           That Condition 7 (of the Conditions put forward by Licensing) had been declined by the applicant, as staff went through eligibility checks within the business, however this was a standard condition for off-licenses and the applicant conceded to its addition.

    ·           Conditions relating to the sale of alcohol were seen as disproportionate as this was a small local shop.

    ·           In relation to Condition 19, the applicant wanted to sell small bottles and change the wording to be consistent with the previous license.

    ·           Customers rarely entered the premises after drinking on other premises.

    ·           The customer base was local, and the applicant wanted to cater to their preferences, not to attract new customers.

    ·           Condition 20 had been objected to as signage was seen as sufficient to prevent the sale of alcohol, but the flexibility was clarified, and the condition agreed.

    ·           Customers entering the premises were rarely intoxicated, and loitering was not an issue.

    ·           Conditions 23 and 27 had not been agreed to as this was a family business and requiring two staff members on the premises was seen as disproportionate due to other security measures, such as CCTV and alarm system, in place.

    ·           The applicant and Sub-Committee agreed that only two members of staff would be required on Friday and Saturday, and that this was proportionate for a family business.

    ·           The family business  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4a