The General Purposes and Licensing Committee of Bromley Council met on Thursday 4 June 2026. The meeting's agenda included discussions on appointments to outside bodies, the council's work programme, and minutes from the Licensing Sub-Committee.

Outside Body Appointments

The committee was scheduled to consider nominations for council representatives to serve on a range of outside bodies and partnerships. These appointments, which are largely made annually, involve various organisations and joint committees. The report pack indicated that a draft schedule of nominations was to be updated and circulated. Among the bodies mentioned for potential appointments were London Councils and the London CIV, with specific roles outlined for committees such as the Leaders' Committee, Transport and Environment Committee, and Grants Committee. Other partnerships listed for consideration included the Safer Bromley Partnership Strategic Group, Safer Neighbourhood Board, Bromley Economic Partnership, Adults Safeguarding Board, and Children's Safeguarding Board. The report also detailed proposed appointments to various children, education, environment, community, and renewal, recreation, and housing services bodies, as well as general appointments and longer-term roles on trusts and committees.

Work Programme and Matters Outstanding

The committee's work programme for the 2026/27 council year was presented for consideration. This included a summary of the committee's responsibilities, which encompass electoral issues, byelaws, staffing matters, open government, complaint procedures, member appointments, health and safety, and licensing functions. The report highlighted that the committee's role is distinct from PDS Committees, as it holds decision-making powers, many of which are delegated to its sub-committees: the Appeals Sub-Committee, Licensing Sub-Committee, and Rights of Way Sub-Committee. The work programme outlined scheduled meetings for the year, with anticipated reports for each. A matter outstanding from a previous meeting concerning the potential appointment of ex-councillors to the Bromley Town Twinning Association was also noted.

Licensing Sub-Committee Minutes

The committee was scheduled to receive and consider the minutes from several meetings of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 23 January, 25 February, 23 March, and 17 April 2026. These minutes detailed decisions made regarding various licensing applications and reviews.

• Old Dunstonian House Club, Dunstans Lane, Beckenham, BR3 3AF: The Licensing Sub-Committee considered an application for a new premises licence. Objections were raised by a local councillor and residents concerning potential public nuisance from music, vehicle movements, and patrons. The applicant, an educational charity, argued the premises assisted the community and that proposed conditions would uphold licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee ultimately granted the application with specific permissions and additional conditions.

• Ornithology Bars & Restaurants Ltd, 125 Queensway, Petts Wood, Orpington, BR5 1DG: An application for a variation to the premises licence was determined. Ward Councillor Tony Owen objected, citing concerns about public nuisance from music and late-night activity, particularly due to residential accommodation above the premises. Residents also raised concerns about noise, congregating customers, and the impact on their ability to enjoy their homes. The applicant, with 20 years of experience, intended to operate a restaurant/wine bar serving cheese and charcuterie with alcohol. The Sub-Committee concluded that granting the application without providing substantial meals with alcohol would negatively impact licensing objectives and decided to refuse the application.

• Pierluigi's, 86-90 High Street, Beckenham, Kent, BR3 1ED: The Metropolitan Police applied to review the premises licence. The committee proceeded in the absence of the premises' representative. Submissions from the Police highlighted repeated attempts to obtain CCTV footage, which were unsuccessful, leading to an inference of deliberate obstruction to conceal licence breaches. The committee considered that the refusal to provide CCTV footage and other documentation constituted breaches of licence conditions and undermined a police investigation. The Sub-Committee resolved to revoke the licence, citing persistent obstruction, lack of cooperation, and a lack of confidence in the premises' ability to operate responsibly.

• Cleaves Express, Orpington, BR6 7HB: Residents objected to a new premises licence application for an off-licence, citing concerns about increased alcohol-related anti-social behaviour, loitering, late-night congregations, and disturbances to residents on a quiet residential street. The applicant's consultant argued that decisions must be evidence-based and that residents could seek a review if problems arose. The Licensing Sub-Committee granted the application subject to several conditions, including the installation and maintenance of a comprehensive CCTV system, operation of a Challenge 25 policy, and the maintenance of an incident register and refusals book.

• Mide Afro Mart, 109 Burnt Ash Lane, Bromley, BR1 5AB: An application for a new premises licence for the sale of alcohol off the premises was determined. Objections from a resident cited concerns about noise, late-night activity, alcohol-related litter, disruptive behaviour, and increased risk to minors. The committee noted the objections but stated decisions must be evidence-based, and as this was a new application, there was no history of harm. The applicant did not attend but submitted representations through a licensing agent, stating they were an experienced and responsible licence holder with an unblemished compliance history. No Responsible Authority objected. The Sub-Committee granted the application with conditions relating to CCTV, a Challenge 25 policy, staff training, and record-keeping.

• Priory Lounge & Tapas Bar, 140 High Street, Orpington, Kent, BR6 0JS: Local residents, the Knoll Residents Association, the Licensing Authority, and the Metropolitan Police objected to the application for a new premises licence. Concerns included noise from late-night music and patrons, parking restrictions, and potential alcohol-related disorder. The applicant's agent proposed amendments to remove live music and stated alcohol sales would be ancillary to food, with the premises not operating as a nightclub. However, Responsible Authorities maintained their objections due to the applicant's criminal record, disregard for planning and company law, and concerns about their ability to act responsibly. The committee concluded that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to operate such premises and determined that any application involving another individual connected to the applicant would not be supported, leading to the refusal of the application.