Decision Maker: Licensing Panel

Outcome: For Determination

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Date of Decision: November 20, 2024

Purpose:

Content:   Notification of decision following a Licensing Panel hearing to determine an application for the grant of a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003   PREMISES:    Cineworld Cinema, Unity Square, Hounslow TW3 1EL   APPLICANT:  Cineworld Holdings Limited (Company number 05212440)    TAKE NOTICE THAT on Wednesday 20th November 2024 following a hearing before the Licensing and General Purposes Sub Committee (the “Licensing Panel” or “Panel”),   HOUNSLOW COUNCIL, as the Licensing Authority for the Premises RESOLVED that:   the application for the variation of a premises licence for Cineworld Cinema, Unity Square, Hounslow TW3 1EL (the “Premises”) is GRANTED subject to the modifications and conditions stated below:   REASONS:   1.          The Panel convened to determine an application by Cineworld Holdings Limited (Company number 05212440) (the “Applicant”) to vary the existing premises licence for the Premises under the Licensing Act 2003.    2.          The Premises is a cinema situated in a development consisting of commercial units on the ground with residential flats above them.  The Premises are currently licenced for the playing of films, plays, live music and recorded music, as well as for the provision of late-night refreshment and the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises.  A copy of the existing licence and the licensable hours and opening hours is shown as Appendix B to the Agenda (the “Existing Licence”).   3.          The application, a copy of which is shown as Appendix A, sought to vary the premises licence to extend the hours for the licensable activities and opening hours as follows:    Supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises: Monday to Sunday:  11:00 to 02:00 (the following day)   Plays, films, live music, recorded music (indoors): Monday to Sunday:  24 hours   Late night refreshment (indoors): Monday to Sunday:  23:00 to 05:00 (the following day)   Hours premises are open to the public: Monday to Sunday:  24 hours   The application also included proposed conditions to be added to the Premises Licence.   4.          The hearing was held in-person before a 3-Member Licensing Panel.  All Members of the Licensing Panel were in attendance throughout the hearing, and during deliberation which took place in a closed session.    5.          The Licensing Panel carefully considered all the relevant information including:   ·       Written and Oral representations by all the parties ·       The Licensing Act 2003 and the steps appropriate to promotethe Licensing Objectives ·       The guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (the “Statutory Guidance”) ·       Hounslow Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy 2020-2025 (the “Council’s Policy”) ·       The Human Rights Act 1998   6.          During the consultation period representations were received from seven parties, all of whom were local residents and their representations were shown as Appendix C.  Another resident submitted some questions, which were responded to by the Applicant, and which was shown as Appendix D.  The representations raised a number of issues, with the main issues falling under the prevention of crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance objectives. Representations were made about noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour that the residents said they had experienced due to the cinema and its customers.   7.          The Applicant was represented by their Solicitor, Mr Taylor, and the Manager for the Premises was also in attendance, although he did not speak.  A number of the objectors were also present.   8.          Mr Taylor stated that the Applicant was not seeking to operate 24 hours a day but had made this application to give flexibility to their performance schedules and to spread out their showings during the day. In particular, he reiterated comments made in the application that the cinema shows, a number of Bollywood and Telugu films that had long running times, sometimes with an intermission, and that they could not be put on at a late time slot as the film would not finish before the end of their licensing hours.  It was stated that they liaised with the Police before making their application, who had suggested some additional conditions if they wanted to operate later, which the Applicant had agreed to and as a result of which the Police had not made a formal representation.  As for the extended alcohol licensing hours, he stated that the primary intention of going to the cinema is to watch films, not to drink.   9.          In relation to some of the specific incidents raised by the objectors, Mr Taylor informed the Panel that they had checked their records and on the day it was reported people were sitting outside the cinema at 2.00am,  the Premises had been closed for about 1 ½ hours that day and on another dates the Premises were still open, and therefore he did not consider these issues to be associated with the Premises.  On the 26th September 2024, when fireworks were let off in the area outside the Premises, the cinema was holding a preview showing of Devara and the fireworks had nothing to do with Cineworld   Mr Taylor went on to say that the Premises will be launching another Bollywood film next month and so they would be bringing in additional security for that event, with bag searches.  Furthermore, most cinema tickets were now bought online, which enabled the venue to better anticipate expected numbers for future showings.   It was also stated that the Premises had sometimes operated longer hours under a temporary event notice without any problems.   10.       The objectors, several of whom stated they also attended the Premises and were generally supportive of the Premises and local businesses, felt that it would be the presence of the Premises that was attracting these customers in the first place, and that they had not felt that the Applicant had done much, if anything, to deal with their customers.  They stated the incidents on the 26th September 2024, when fireworks were let off outside the Premises, supposedly by customers of the Applicant, caused a lot of alarm to local residents as in addition to the noise nuisance, some of the fireworks went in the direction of their flats and even though the Police attended no one did anything to stop the people involved or move them on.  The feeling was that the Applicant had relinquished any responsibility for this incident as well as in dealing with people coming to the area to visit the Premises.  It was stated that residents were experiencing nuisance on a regular basis and that complaints had been made to their managing agents about the issue.   11.       Questions were raised about the extended alcohol hours and how the limitation of 2 alcoholic drinks per customer would be supervised, and the Panel was informed that the Applicant had a tried and tested method of allocating paper tickets to customers wanting to have alcohol and stamping the tickets when they were given a drink.  Mr Taylor confirmed this could mean someone who was not drinking could use their ticket to buy alcohol for someone who was, but he again stressed that drinking alcohol was not the primary purpose for people going to a cinema.    12.       Furthermore, the additional conditions include a requirement to ensure customers dispersed from the area, and that they used SIA staff.  The objectors raised concerns as to whether the requirement for at least one SIA staff would be enough, although the Panel notes that the proposed conditions included a requirement on the DPS to carry out a risk assessment for further SIA staff.   13.       The Applicant noted that the Premises were in the Council’s Cumulative Impact Area, but they had not believed that the application together with the additional conditions, would add to the cumulative impact.    14.       The Statutory Guidance states that:   “2.15 The 2003 Act enables licensing authorities and responsible authorities, through representations, to consider what constitutes public nuisance and what is appropriate to prevent it in terms of conditions attached to specific premises licences and club premises certificates. It is therefore important that in considering the promotion of this licensing objective, licensing authorities and responsible authorities focus on the effect of the licensable activities at the specific premises on persons living and working (including those carrying on business) in the area around the premises which may be disproportionate and unreasonable. The issues will mainly concern noise nuisance, light pollution, noxious smells and litter.   15.       As stated by Mr Taylor, none of the Responsible Authorities had submitted a representation in respect of this application, and it was stated that the Applicant had liaised with the Police, who, according to the Statutory Guidance, the Licensing Authority would look to as the main source of advice on crime and disorder.  On the other hand, one of the objectors informed the Panel that he had also spoken to the Police (apparently the same Officer who liaised with the Applicant) who supposedly advised him to attend the hearing and put forward his objections.   16.       With regard to the additional conditions in the application, these would only come into effect on days when the licensable activities were scheduled to finish after 02:30 in the morning, which was considerably into the more sensitive hours of the day when the Statutory Guidance says any appropriate conditions should be focussed upon.   This means that if the Premises were scheduled to close at 02:29 in the morning, you could have customers leaving the Premises from 23:00 at night to 02:29 in the morning without any requirement on the Applicant to have a SIA guard, or to ensure customers dispersed and did not loiter in the area.    The Panel noted the arguments from both sides, with the Applicant denying there was any evidence that its customers were responsible for any of the noise nuisance and ASB, and the objectors saying they believe its customers were responsible for this and that they regularly experienced issues.   In the Panel’s opinion, with the Premises located adjacent to residential tower blocks, if customers left the Premises in the early hours there was a real risk this could cause noise nuisance to residents in those flats.   The Panel considered that the additional conditions proposed by the Applicant should take effect from an earlier time and with the Licensing Authority’s Policy having a core hours policy that has a termination time of 00:00 on Friday and Saturday, the Panel believed this would be a reasonable time from which the Applicant’s proposed conditions should take effect.   17.       Whilst customers could also cause problems as they dispersed down nearby roads, the Statutory Guidance is clear that the Applicant is only responsible for customers in the immediate vicinity of the Premises. The Existing Licence already contained conditions for CCTV and for signage asking customers to leave the area quietly.    18.       It was noted during the hearing that one of the additional conditions to come into effect after 02:30 would be for there to be at least one SIA security staff member on duty after 20:00 until closing.  However, if the Premises were to remain open for 24 hours, that would mean the Premises would not be “closing” and would be required to have at least one SIA staff member from 20:00 on day 1 and the entirety of day 2 until the Premises actually closed on whichever day that was.   Mr Taylor noted this oversight and suggested that in that case, the SIA could remain on duty until 09:00 the following morning.    19.       Whilst not addressed during the hearing, a similar problem concerning a lack of a termination time in situations where the Premises remained open for 24 hours also arose with the Applicant’s other proposed conditions regarding dispersal of its customers that would take effect “once the premises is closed”.   Therefore, if a variation was granted, the Applicant’s proposed conditions would need to be amended to provide for a termination time for the same where the Premises are scheduled to remain open for 24 hours.  With the Applicant suggesting that where the Premises remain open for 24 hours the requirement for the SIA staff member could end at 09:00 the following day, the Panel considered this same time would be an appropriate end time for the other proposed conditions.   20.       If the time from which the additional conditions come in to effect was brought in from midnight rather than 02:30 and the proposed conditions modified to take account of the situation where the Premises remain open for 24 hours, then the Panel was of the view that this would not add to the cumulative impact in the area, and the conditions would also be sufficient to support the licensing objectives.    21.       Having taken all matters into account the Panel therefore decided to GRANT the application for a premises licence, amended as follows:   Supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises: Monday to Sunday:  11:00 to 02:00 (the following day)   Plays, films, live music, recorded music (indoors): Monday to Sunday:  24 hours   Late night refreshment (indoors): Monday to Sunday:  23:00 to 05:00 (the following day)   Hours premises are open to the public: Monday to Sunday:  24 hours   The following additional conditions to apply only when licensable activities are scheduled to finish after 00:00:   1.          At least one SIA trained security officer will be on duty after 20:00 hours until closing or until 09:00 the following day, whichever is the earlier, and further SIA trained staff will be deployed at the discretion of the DPS.   2.          The DPS will be responsible for carrying out a risk assessment for the need for further SIA staff.   3.          The DPS and staff will be responsible for making sure their customers leave and disperse the area from 00:00 to 09:00 the following day, or until and including when the premises is closed, whichever is the earlier.   4.     After 20:00, the premises will implement a method to ensure customers may not purchase more than two alcoholic drinks per person.     Right to Appeal   22.       Any party aggrieved with the decision of the Licensing Panel on one or more grounds set out in schedule 5 of Licensing Act 2003 may appeal to the local Magistrate’s Court within 21 days of notification of this decision.