Now contains additional information submitted by the applicant.

The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Head of Planning, Building Control and Licensing concerning a Review of a Premises Licence. The Hearing Panel considered the written representations within the papers and the oral representations of the parties who attended the hearing, as well as the relevant legislation.

The Premises Licence Holder’s (PLH) representative had previously requested this item to be deferred on 27 January 2025 to submit additional evidence. That additional evidence was CCTV footage from the Premises; however, it had not been submitted in advance of the meeting. The PLH’s representative requested that they be allowed to show it during the hearing. Their reasons for not submitting the evidence in advance of the meeting was that there were technical issues when trying to send electronically. The PLH’s representative also claimed that they had been informed they would not be able to hand deliver a USB stick to the Premises Licensing team. The representative stated that they had a chain of emails to show this. The clerk confirmed they had access to those emails to provide to the Panel.

The Panel sought representations from Greater Manchester Police (GMP) and Trading Standards. GMP stated that the PLH had ample opportunity to find a way to provide their additional evidence. GMP were not satisfied that they would not be prejudiced by the submission of late evidence during the hearing. Trading Standards agreed with GMP.

The Panel deliberated in private regarding the late submission of evidence. The Panel viewed the chain of emails referenced by the PLH’s representative. The Panel were satisfied that the chain of emails did not state the PLH could not hand deliver a USB stick. The Panel saw that the PLH’s representative had initially contacted the Premises Licensing team on Thursday 30 January 2025. After that, there was no contact until Friday 7 February 2025, at which point the PLH’s representative informed the Premises Licensing team that they were having difficulty in sending across the evidence. The Panel accepted that the PLH’s representative had ample opportunity to find an alternative method of submitting their evidence. The Panel were satisfied that GMP and Trading Standards would be prejudiced by submitting evidence during the hearing, therefore the Panel did not allow the evidence to be submitted.

GMP, who applied for the review, addressed the Hearing Panel. On 13th November 2024, GMP, in company with other responsible authorities, executed warrants under Section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act at the premises following numerous pieces of intelligence that the premises were being used to facilitate the sale and distribution of Psychoactive Substances, namely Nitrous Oxide, a class C drug.

A search was then conducted at the premises and, as a result of prior intelligence, a white van parked outside the takeaway and linked to the address by intelligence was searched and a large quantity of nitrous oxide cannisters have been located. This vehicle was linked to the Premises by being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The Hearing Panel were informed that all remaining representations had been agreed and withdrawn prior to the hearing, therefore no decision was necessary.