Agenda item

6.1

The Chief Licensing Officer submitted four reports to consider (a) the review of two premises licences under Section 53A of the Licensing Act, 2003, in respect of premises known as The Pitsmoor Hotel, 448 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield S3 9AY (Ref No.07/22) and the review of premises known as The Staffordshire Arms, 40 Sorby Street, Sheffield S4 7LB (Ref No.08/22) and (b) applications to vary a premises licence to specify an individual as a designated premises supervisor of the Pitsmoor Hotel (Ref No.11/22) and the Staffordshire Arms (Ref No.12/22).

6.2

Present at the meeting were Ian Armitage, Catherine Jarvis and James Ketteringham (South Yorkshire Police), Julie Hague (Sheffield Safeguarding Children Partnership), Gareth Barrett (Licensing Strategy and Policy Officer), Ashley Greasby, Paige Greasby and Louise Leggitt (Applicants) Chris Weldon (local resident), Jayne Gough Licensing Strategy and Policy Officer), Marie-Claire Frankie (Legal Advisor to the Sub-Committee) and Jennie Skiba (Democratic Services).

6.3

In view of the circumstances, the parties had agreed that the four cases in Items 6 and 7 on the agenda would be heard together.

6.4

Marie-Claire Frankie outlined the procedure which would be followed during the hearing.

6.5

Jayne Gough presented the reports to the Sub-Committee, and it was noted that representations had been received from South Yorkshire Police, Sheffield Children Safeguarding Partnership and the Licensing Service and were attached as Appendices to the report.

6.5

Catherine Jarvis and James Ketteringham reported on the objections of South Yorkshire Police to the applications, referring to the information contained in the papers, and circulated prior to the meeting, which highlighted a number of issues with regard to the operation of the two premises. Ms. Jarvis and Mr. Ketteringham stated that, as well as all the incidents now referred to, the police did not consider the applicants to be fit and proper persons to be granted a premises licence or a Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) for the premises.

6.6

Julie Hague reported on the representations made by the Sheffield Safeguarding Children Partnership, referring to the information contained in the papers, and circulated prior to the meeting, which highlighted a number of issues with regard to the operation of the two premises. Ms. Hague stated that, as well as all the incidents now referred to, she did not consider the applicants to be  fit and proper persons to be granted a licence.

6.7

Gareth Barrett reported on the representations made by the Licensing Service, referring to the information contained in the papers, and circulated prior to the meeting, which highlighted a number of issues with regard to the operation of the two premises. Mr. Barrett stated that, as well as all the incidents now referred to, he did not consider the applicants to be fit and proper persons to be a Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) for the premises.

6.8

The applicants put forward their case, providing an explanation as to the incidents now referred to, stressing that despite the issues, they were willing to work with the responsible authorities in connection with the operation of the premises.

6.9

The applicant responded to a number of questions raised by Members of, and the Solicitor to, the Sub-Committee and by Jayne Gough, Julie Hague and James Ketteringham.

6.10

All the parties present summarised their cases.

6.11

Jayne Gough reported on the options available to the Sub-Committee.

6.12

RESOLVED: That the attendees involved in the applications be excluded from the meeting before further discussion takes place on the grounds that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, if those persons were present, there would be a disclosure to them of exempt information as described in paragraphs 2 and 5 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.

6.13

Marie-Claire Frankie reported orally, giving legal advice on various aspects of the applications.

6.14

RESOLVED: That, in the light of the contents of the reports now submitted, together with the additional information circulated and the representations now made, including the responses provided to the questions raised:-

(a)      the interim steps imposed at the hearing held on 23^rd December, 2021, be amended and the licence for the premises known as The Pitsmoor Hotel, 448 Pitsmoor Road, Sheffield S3 9AY be revoked (Ref No.07/22);

(b)      the licence for the premises known as The Staffordshire Arms, 40 Sorby Street, Sheffield S4 7LB be revoked (Ref No.08/22); and

(c)      applications to vary a premises licence to specify an individual as a designated premises supervisor of the Pitsmoor Hotel (Ref No.11/22) and the Staffordshire Arms (Ref No.12/22) be refused.

(The full reasons for the Sub-Committee’s decision will be included in the written Notices of Determination).