The Licensing Sub Committee met on Tuesday 24 February 2026 to consider two applications. The first was for a new premises licence for Tobacco Dock, which was granted with additional conditions. The second application was for a variation of the premises licence for Shell Old Ford to extend alcohol sales to 24 hours, which was refused.

Tobacco Dock Premises Licence Application

The committee granted a new premises licence for Tobacco Dock at 50 Porters Walk, London E1W 2SF. The application was for a shadow licence held by the landlord, Tobacco Dock Ltd, to protect their interests. Local residents had raised objections concerning noise pollution, traffic, and anti-social behaviour from patrons.

Robert Sutherland, representing the applicant, explained that this was a duplicate licence intended to be used only if the current tenant, Tobacco Dock Ventures Limited, failed to uphold their licence obligations. He stated that the responsible authorities had no objections and that the landlord had previously intervened to address issues, such as removing the light bar area due to resident complaints.

Mr. John Newland, a local resident, objected to the application, expressing concerns about potential nuisance and the sale of alcohol outside the hours of other local venues. He proposed harmonising the licensing hours with those of nearby shops like Wapping Wines and Sainsbury's to prevent spillover nuisance.

Councillor Mushtak Ahmed asked how the landlord could justify the licence given resident concerns. Mr. Sutherland reiterated that the licence was a protective measure and not intended for active use. He explained that the landlord had a management company to liaise with residents and exert pressure on the tenant if necessary. Jonathan Melnick, the Legal Advisor, clarified that a landlord already has control over a tenant through the lease, and the benefit of a shadow licence was primarily to protect the landlord's interest if the tenant's licence was compromised.

The subcommittee resolved to grant the licence with additional conditions, including those related to CCTV, incident logs, refused sales records, and staff training, replacing existing conditions and ensuring the promotion of the licensing objectives.

Shell Old Ford Variation Application

The committee refused an application to vary the premises licence for Shell Old Ford at 445 Wick Lane, London E3 2TB, to extend alcohol sales for off-premises consumption to 24 hours a day. The existing licence permitted alcohol sales between 6 am and 11:30 pm (or midnight on Fridays and Saturdays), with late-night refreshment available until 5 am.

Sarah Clover, representing the applicant Shell UK Oil Products Limited, argued that the extension was necessary to meet customer expectations for a 24-hour retail outlet and to remain competitive. She highlighted that the premises was no longer in a cumulative impact zone and that there had been no objections from responsible authorities. She also pointed to a previous letter from objector Michael Dover in 2021, which praised improvements made to the site, including the installation of number plate reading cameras and a 15-minute vehicle stay limit, which had reduced issues.

Michael Dover, a local resident, strongly objected to the application, citing 26 years of living next to the petrol station and experiencing significant noise and disturbance. He argued that the extension would exacerbate these issues, particularly attracting young people attending parties in the area. He detailed problems with noise from vehicles, litter, and patrons using his house as a urinal due to the unavailability of the petrol station's toilets between midnight and 6 am. Mr. Dover also expressed concern about the impact on residents in newly developed properties nearby, such as Iceland Wharf. He stated that the few hours overnight when alcohol sales were prohibited were precious and crucial for his ability to sleep.

Councillor Bodrul Choudhury inquired about the consultation process. Lavine Miller-Johnson, the Licensing Officer, confirmed that statutory notices were displayed, and a local newspaper advertisement was placed. She also noted that the council's policy involved mailing out notices within a 40-meter radius.

The subcommittee noted that the existing conditions on the licence would continue to apply. However, after hearing arguments from both sides, the committee decided to refuse the application. They cited concerns regarding the prevention of crime and disorder, public nuisance, and public safety, particularly in light of the increased residential density in the area and the potential for increased noise and anti-social behaviour during the extended hours. The committee also referenced the council's licensing policy, which takes a strong view on applications for late hours in close proximity to residential premises.