Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Licensing and Appeals Sub Committee Hearing Panel - Monday, 22nd May, 2023 10.10 am

Venue: Council Antechamber, Level 2, Town Hall Extension. View directions

Contact: Ian Smith 

Note: (or at the rise of the Licensing Sub-Committee Hearing Panel) 

Items
No. Item

48.

Renewal of Sex Establishment Licence - Clone Zone, 36-38 Sackville Street, Manchester, M1 3WA pdf icon PDF 126 KB

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

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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

 

The Hearing Panel had been requested to consider site visits to establish whether the premises should be defined as a sex shop under Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982. The Hearing Panel conducted site visits to Clone Zone and a high street chain, similarly selling clothing, undergarments and sex toys/aids. Currently, Clone Zone was having to renew their licence as a Sex Establishment annually, yet the high street chain was not subject to the same legislation. The proprietor of Clone Zone confirmed the percentage of sales from the shop floor of sex toys/aids as 13.9%. He also confirmed that DVD sales had ceased for some time now and that the licensing requirement was solely down to these items being sold.

 

The Hearing Panel retired to a private session to ascertain whether they considered that Clone Zone sold or displayed sex items to a “significant degree.”

 

The Hearing Panel invited attendees back into the hearing and reported that they had concluded that the shop did not sell or display sex items to a significant degree, that Clone Zone was similar in nature to the high street chain, albeit aimed at a different demographic, and asked the proprietor if they now wished to withdraw their application now that the premises had technically been removed of any requirement to do so.

 

The proprietor thanked the Hearing Panel and confirmed that their withdrawal of the application.

49.

Exclusion of the Public

The officers consider that the following item or items contains exempt information as provided for in the Local Government Access to Information Act and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. The Committee is recommended to agree the necessary resolutions excluding the public from the meeting during consideration of these items. At the time this agenda is published no representations have been that this part of the meeting should be open to the public.

Minutes:

A recommendation was made that the public be excluded during consideration of the following items of business.

 

Decision

 

To exclude the public during consideration of the following items which involved consideration of exempt information relating to the financial or business affairs of particular persons, and public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

50.

Urgent Business - Review of a Private Hire Driver Licence - FTR

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

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Hearing Panel considered the content of the report and the written and oral representations made by the Licensing Unit officer and FTR who was accompanied by their solicitor and two members of their driver unit.

 

The Licensing Unit officer addressed the Hearing Panel, stating that FTR was appearing before Sub-Committee for consideration of the review of a private hire driver licence. FTR’s private hire driver licence was suspended with immediate effect. FTR was involved in a road traffic accident, whilst driving their private hire

vehicle, where FTR collided with a stationary vehicle. FTR had a passenger on board who sustained injuries during the incident. CCTV had been distributed ahead of the hearing. The footage had been provided by a neighbour of the owner of the struck vehicle. FTR confirmed that they were the driver in the incident and stated that the passenger was a drunken female. 2 days later a complaint was received from the partner of the female passenger with more details of the incident and photos of the injuries sustained. The Licensing Unit raised their concerns around FTR leaving the scene without sharing contact details with the owner of the struck vehicle and also not taking the passenger to hospital. FTR was suspended with immediate effect.

 

In responding to questions from FTR’s solicitor, the Licensing Unit officer stated that the aerial view of the incident site was from Google Maps and that this may not accurately represent the scene at the time of the incident, therefore it may not be known if there was room for FTR to have pulled over immediately after striking the vehicle, although it did show the layout of the road and pavement. The Licensing Unit officer also confirmed that the unit had not spoken to the neighbour who supplied the CCTV footage.

 

FTR’s agent stated that FTR accepted his involvement in the incident and explained that they had collected the passenger from a pub who then refused to put on a seatbelt. The passenger had distracted FTR to the point that they could not concentrate of driving which led to the crash. Afterwards, there was traffic on the road and FTR could not pull over until they arrived at the first available junction which FTR then turned into, having deemed this to be the safest available area. FTR had returned to the site of the crash but did not see anyone to exchange details with, offered the passenger to be taken to hospital by another driver from the fleet but she refused, stating that she wanted to return home. A member of the fleet confirmed that they had arrived at the scene to find FTR shaken up. FTR had told the base about the incident and thought that they would tell the authorities. It was the owner of the struck vehicle who contacted the taxi firm base and made it clear that they wanted to have no contact with the driver (FTR) and would not give their contact details, therefore, FTR could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

51.

Urgent Business - Review of a Private Hire Driver Licence - MS

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

Additional documents:

Minutes:

On entering the hearing, MS stated, via the interpreter appointed to them by the council, that they had been advised to attend without their barrister.

 

The Licensing Unit officer relayed information to the Hearing Panel that MS had been listed for a hearing on 15 May 2023 but this had been deferred due to MS’s barrister not being available until mid-June, which would potentially move the hearing date to July. The unit had informed MS that they could appoint an alternative representative for this hearing.

 

The Chair of the Hearing Panel requested to see a copy of the message sent to MS to ascertain whether they were given enough time to appoint an alternative representative.

 

The Licensing Unit officer retrieved the email sent to MS and the Hearing Panel considered that MS should be allowed time to attend with their barrister but informed MS that the hearing may have to go ahead at a future date if their barrister was unavailable on this date.

 

Decision

 

To defer the hearing until 19 June 2023 to allow MS to attend with their barrister.