Agenda item

Consideration was given to a report of the Principal Licensing Officer which asked the Panel to determine an application for a Temporary Event Notice served on the Council in relation to a Christmas Event at The Anglers Arms, 95 Wrigley Head, Failsworth, Manchester, M35 9BH.

The Panel was informed that on the 3rd December 2021 the applicant, Annette Nokes, served a temporary event notice in respect of the premises named above. The last date for representations in relation to this application was 8th December 2021.

A representation had been received from Environmental Health on 7th December 2021 relating to concerns of previous complaints. This representation was attached at Appendix 3 of the report.

The Panel were asked to consider the Authority’s Licensing Policy Statement. Their attention was drawn to Section 8 – Public Nuisance. They were also asked to consider the statutory guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The legal provisions around Temporary Event Notices (TEN’s) were outlined and Members were informed that the only conditions a licensing authority could impose on a TEN were the existing conditions on the premises licence or club premises certificate at the venue.

The Panel were reminded that the steps available to them were:

a.    Confirm the notice as served on the Licensing Authority

b.    To reject the notice and issue a counter notice

It was clarified that there was no option to modify the application.

The steps taken that were appropriate to promote the licensing objectives should be specified. If none of the steps were appropriate and proportionate, no action should be taken.

In arriving at a decision Members must have regard to the relevant provisions of national guidance and the licensing policy statement and reasons must be given for any departure. The decision should be based on the individual merits of the application.

The Applicant was not in attendance.

The Panel heard from Russell White from the Environmental Health Service, who informed them of a previous event at the premises in July 2021, which had generated complaints about noise and anti-social behaviour. An event advertised as a family fun day had become a music festival and had caused nuisance as the premises were in a residential area.

He had visited the premises and met with the applicant to discuss the concerns that a market event was likely to attract a lot of people and traffic and would again cause public nuisance.

Initially a one-day event had been proposed and this would have been acceptable and could have built confidence in the applicant’s ability to hold a good event. It had then become a full weekend event and there were concerns that an event of that size would be beyond the applicant’s control and would again not be restricted as indicated in the application.

Members asked for and received clarification of the following:-

·         Why a full weekend would be worse than one day – a one-day event would be much smaller and easier to control. The applicant needed to prove that she could run an event correctly.

·         Other events after July – a bonfire and a pumpkin event, both of which had been very small and local. A Christmas market was expected to be much bigger and cause more nuisance. It was the first application for a large event since the July event, which had not been as applied for.

·         Time of licence in July – had been until 9.00pm, but the event had been very different from that applied for.

·         Conditions on TEN – only those already on the premises licence

·         Could the times be restricted – the Panel could only grant or refuse what had been applied for. The application could not be modified.

There were no closing statements.

RESOLVED that having regard to the statutory licensing objectives, in particular the prevention of public nuisance, the application was REFUSED.

The Panel gave the following reasons:-

1.    The Panel had considered the application and the objection from the Council’s Environmental Health Section and had noted that a previous event in July 2021 had resulted in a number of noise nuisance complaints.

2.      The Panel considered that to grant the application would undermine the licensing objectives, in particular the prevention of public nuisance.