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

The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Directorof Planning, Building Control and Licensing regarding the above application.  The written papers and oral representations of the parties who attended were also considered, as well as the relevant legislation. The panel were informed that the applicant was unable to attend the hearing due to being abroad. As there was no available date for the application to be deferred to before the event was due to take place, the panel considered the Temporary Event Notice in the absence of the applicant.

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) addressed the Hearing Panel, noting the event was for a food truck to sell alcohol from 7.00pm to 3.00am. GMP did not believe there was sufficient evidence in the application to show how the Licensing Objectives of the Prevention of Crime and Disorder and the Prevention of Public Nuisance would be upheld. GMP noted the application was to serve alcohol to up to 50 people at a time. GMP had concerns regarding the location of the event, noting that the application was to serve alcohol, but that people would need to drive to the location, believing that would increase the possibility of drink driving.

The panel’s legal representative sought clarity on where the truck would be situated. GMP stated they had not seen a plan of this, simply seeing the image of the car park submitted in the report.

GMP had nothing to add when invited to sum up.

In their deliberations, the Hearing Panel considered the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, the Licensing Act 2003, the Regulations made there under and the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of that Act and the licensing objectives. The panel had to consider whether they were satisfied that the event would uphold the Licensing Objectives, and if they were not then it is policy to issue a counter notice. The panel were satisfied with GMP’s evidence that stated the Licensing Objectives would not be upheld if the event went ahead. The panel felt the applicant had provided a lack of detail with insufficient evidence of their knowledge of, or how to uphold, the Licensing Objectives.

Decision

To issue a counter-notice to the application.