Agenda and minutes

The public and press have a legal right to attend Council meetings such as the Licensing Sub-Committee, except where business is confidential or certain other sensitive information is to be discussed. The following items are in the private part of the agenda as they include information that relates to action that may be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime, which is exempt from publication under paragraph 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

It was resolved to exclude the public and press for the remainder of the meeting by reason of the nature of the business to be discussed which included information exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 7 of Part 1, Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

Following an application made under Section 53A of the Licensing Act 2003 by the Metropolitan Police Service (“the Applicant”) for a summary review of premises licences held at the Kings Bull, 2 North Street, Barking, an urgent meeting of the Licensing Sub-Committee was convened. The Kings Bull operates two premises licenses, covering the main building and external area. For the record, the application was made regarding both premises licenses.

The review concerned a serious incident that occurred on 17 July 2022 in which an altercation broke out, resulting in serious life changing injuries for a patron. In those circumstances the applicant requested that pending a full review interim steps be considered, namely the suspension with immediate effect of both licenses.

Further details regarding the incident were provided by the legal representative for OG Real Dreams Ltd, licenses holder (“the Respondent”). It was stated that a fight broke out following a disagreement between two external promoters, although by way of mitigation it was stated that Members should take comfort that the promoters were not professionals, who lost control, rather, they were two teachers who were acquaintances of the owners, who undertake promoting ‘on the side’. Rather than provide any comfort to the Sub-Committee, it was seen as a cause of concern that the owners would turn to non-professional promoters for such an event. This in their view demonstrated a serious lack of judgment. The Sub-Committee also posed a number of clarifying questions, such as to the premises licences operating hours and the location of the incident.

The respondent did propose a number of steps to avoid in their opinion the need for the suspension of the licences. These included an immediate cessation of all externally promoted events and the engagement of a new external security company according to ACS SIA standards, who could be in place within 48 hours. Whilst the proposed additional steps were welcomed, the Sub-Committee did not feel this would address the underlying cause of the issue, namely a lack of judgment and poor management by the owners, and it begged the question as to why such a high level of security should be needed at a premises of this nature.

The legal representative for the respondent further stated that the venue was a central pillar for the black community, and that as such the Sub-Committee in its decision making was urged to have regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) imposed under Section 149 of the Equalities Act 2010.

The Sub-Committee considered carefully the detail of the written and oral submission from both the applicant and respondent. They were particularly mindful that no specific facts, figures or evidence were presented by the respondent as to the importance of the venue, nor the availability of other venues for the community. Therefore, in reaching its decision whilst the Sub-Committee had due regard to its obligations under the Equality Act 2010, its primary duty of care was to ensure that the four licensing objectives were promoted by the licenses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.