The Licensing Sub-Committee (2) of Westminster Council met on Thursday 19 February 2026 to consider two licensing applications. The committee refused an application to vary the premises licence for Two Floors at 3 and 4 Kingly Street, London, W1B 5PD, and decided not to take any further action regarding a review of the premises licence for The Globe, 43-47 Marylebone Road, London, NW1 5JY.

Variation of Premises Licence for Two Floors , 3 and 4 Kingly Street, London, W1B 5PD

The committee refused an application to vary the premises licence for Two Floors to extend its licensable activities and opening hours from Monday to Sunday until 1 am. The premises, located within the West End Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ), had applied to extend its hours beyond the council's core hours.

Representations were received from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), Environmental Health Services (EHS), the Licensing Authority (LA), and the Soho Society, all objecting to the application. The MPS highlighted concerns about the prevention of crime and disorder, public nuisance, and public safety, noting that the area already experiences high levels of crime and disorder, particularly between 11:30 pm and 1 am. The EHS and LA echoed these concerns, stating that extending hours outside core times risked increased public nuisance and potential impacts on public safety. The Soho Society argued the application was contrary to policies CIP1 and PB1, which indicate a presumption to refuse such applications within the CIZ unless genuinely exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.

The applicant, Barworks (Soho) Limited, argued that the premises was well-run with no history of complaints and that extending hours would allow them to retain existing customers, reducing the number of people circulating in the CIZ. They also highlighted that neighbouring premises had later operating hours. Marc Baum, representing the applicant, stated that the extension was necessary for financial viability and to compete with nearby venues.

However, the committee found that the application, including proposed conditions, did not sufficiently address how extending hours would avoid adding to the cumulative impact in the area or demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify a departure from policy. They noted that while the premises itself was not a high crime generator, the existing and cumulative levels of crime and disorder in the area were a significant concern. The committee concluded that the proposed conditions did not adequately address the protection or control of customers once they leave the premises and enter the CIZ, particularly at a time when police resources are limited.

Review of Premises Licence for The Globe, 43-47 Marylebone Road, London, NW1 5JY

The committee decided not to take any steps under section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003 following a review of the premises licence for The Globe. The review was brought by a local resident, Michael Zelouf, on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance. Mr Zelouf alleged that noise from patrons leaving the pub after midnight continued to cause disturbance, despite previous licence reviews and imposed conditions.

The Environmental Health Service (EHS) stated that they had not identified any statutory noise nuisance during their investigations, despite receiving complaints. They noted that on one occasion, the complainant confirmed the noise had stopped by the time officers attended, and on another, officers found no one outside the pub. The EHS also stated that noise monitoring equipment would not be effective due to the distance and background noise.

The premises licence holder, Greene King Retailing Limited, represented by Matthew Phipps of TLT Solicitors, opposed the review, arguing that there was no evidence of public nuisance caused by the premises. They contended that the complaints were based on limited incidents and that the applicant was conflating people seen on the street with patrons of the pub. They also highlighted that no other residents had complained and that the pub was already operating with reduced hours compared to its licence. Mr Phipps suggested the review was frivolous, vexatious, and repetitious.

In their decision, the committee noted that the EHS did not support the review and that other responsible authorities had not made adverse submissions. They found that the evidence presented by Mr Zelouf was at best limited and at worst non-existent, with no clear proof that any noise nuisance was caused by patrons of The Globe. The committee considered the applicant's actions to be vexatious, causing aggravation and annoyance to the licence holder, and deemed the requested reduction in trading hours disproportionate and inappropriate. Consequently, the committee decided not to take any action under section 52 of the Licensing Act 2003, meaning the licence conditions remain unchanged. They also advised that any future reviews brought by the applicant should be supported by proper evidence.