Decision Maker: Licensing Sub Committee C

Outcome: For Determination

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Date of Decision: October 2, 2025

Purpose:

Content:  DECISION NOTICE 1. Glorious Food & Wine, 12 Perry Vale, Forest Hill, London SE23 2LD (“the Premises”) has a premises licence for the retail sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises. The premises licence holder (‘PLH’) is Mr Mustaq Ahmed Khan, who is also the designated premises supervisor (‘DPS’) and owner. The hours for the Licensed activity are: 08.00 – 23.00 Monday to Saturday 10.00 – 22.30 Sunday 2. Valda Parker of Lewisham Trading Standards submitted an application for a review of the premises licence on 8th August 2025, under the process in section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003 (‘the Act’), because of matters arsing at the premises in connection with the licencing objectives for the protection of children from harm and the prevention of crime and disorder. 3. On 18th September 2024, a test purchase was made at the premises where a can of beer was sold to a 14-year-old boy and Mr Khan was issued with a formal warning letter. The premises was revisited on 18th June 2025 and a test purchase of a bottle of beer was made by a 16-year-old boy. In interview under caution Mr Khan admitted he had not asked the cadet for identification. There were other licensing breaches and with two sales of alcohol to underage purchasers within a year, Lewisham Trading Standards recommended Mr Khan be removed as DPS and a list of proposed conditions be added to Annex 3 (enclosed herewith) 4. The Application for a Review was served on all responsible authorities and was advertised in accordance with the Regulations. The final date for receiving representations was the 9th September 2025. 5. Representations were received from the local authority acting as the responsible authority supporting the licence review application and endorsing the recommendations for action proposed by Trading Standards. 6. A representation was received from a local resident supporting the licence review application on the grounds that the operation of the premises had not been promoting the Licensing Objectives. The representation was received within the specified time, was examined by Officers and was not considered to be vexatious or frivolous. 7. The Licensing Sub-Committee C held a hearing on the 2nd October 2025 to consider the review of the Premises Licence. Licensing officer, Kennedy Obazee, introduced the report and Valda Parker of Lewisham Trading Standards explained the investigation that had been undertaken and the recommendations being made. 8. The Licensing Officer, Kennedy Obazee, informed the sub-committee that an application had been approved for the premises licence to be transferred from Mr Khan to another person, and he was also no longer the designated premises supervisor. 9. The outgoing premises licence holder, Mr Mustaq Ahmed Khan, addressed the Committee explaining that because of his age and the state of his health, he was stepping down from running the shop. He confirmed that he had sold the business and was no longer the owner. 10. The member of the public who had submitted written representations in support did not attend to speak at the meeting. Members were invited to ask questions and at the end, those making representations were given an opportunity to briefly sum up their positions. 11. In arriving at its decision, the Committee has considered all the papers contained in the report pack and filed documents, including the written submissions, together with the oral submissions made at the hearing. The Committee also considered the Council’s own Statement of Licensing Policy 2020-25 and the latest Home Office Statutory Guidance, revised in December 2023. 12.The Sub-Committee considered the possible steps it had the power to take on review under s.52 of the Act and decided to allow the premises licence for the sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises, to continue subject the additional recommended conditions contained in Annex 3. 13. The Committee’s reasons for taking this decision are: a. There was now no need to consider removal of the DPS since the outgoing owner, who had been responsible for both of the underage sales, had taken that step himself and he was also no longer the PLH. b. The extra conditions were necessary to promote the licensing objectives in particular those for the protection of children from harm and the prevention of crime and disorder and overall were a proportionate response. 14. There is a right of appeal against this decision. Any appeal should be made to the Magistrates’ court within 21 days beginning with the day on which the Appellant was notified of the decision. Any person who has given notice of appeal on a licensing decision to the Magistrates Court, or is considering doing so, should not approach council officers for legal advice. A person making an appeal should seek independent legal advice, for instance, from a firm of solicitors or the local Citizens Advice Bureau may be able to assist. 2nd October 2025