The Licensing Sub Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Thursday 16 July 2026 to consider three applications for premises licences. The committee granted one application to vary a premises licence for Holy Carrot, allowing for extended alcohol sales and off-sales. However, two applications for new premises licences were refused: one for Second Home Spitalfields, due to concerns about public nuisance and cumulative impact, and another for Lebanese Grill, also citing public nuisance and cumulative impact issues within the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone.

Holy Carrot, 61-63 Brushfield Street, London E1 6AA

The Sub-Committee granted the application to vary the premises licence for Holy Carrot. The variation allows for the sale of alcohol to commence an hour earlier, from 10:00 am instead of 11:00 am, to facilitate a brunch offering. It also permits off-sales of alcohol, restricted to sealed containers, and amends a condition to allow customers on the external terrace to consume alcohol without ordering a meal. The committee was satisfied that these changes would not adversely impact the licensing objectives, particularly given the restaurant's focus on high-quality food and the premium nature of the alcohol sold. Objections from SPIRE, a local residents' association, and local residents were considered, but the applicant's agent, Alex Tomlinson, successfully argued that the proposed changes were modest and consistent with the operation of a contemporary restaurant. The committee noted that the extended morning hours were not objected to by the responsible authorities or residents, and that the off-sales of premium products were unlikely to encourage street drinking.

Second Home Spitalfields, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London E1 5JL

The Sub-Committee refused the application for a new premises licence for Second Home Spitalfields. The application sought to extend the permitted hours for alcohol sales and regulated entertainment, and to license all floors of the building, which is primarily a co-working space. Objections were received from SPIRE, local residents, and the Licensing Authority, primarily concerning the prevention of public nuisance and the potential for increased noise and disturbance. Ms. Genevieve Woods, counsel for the applicant, argued that the application was an exception to the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) policy due to the premises' existing licence and the use of Temporary Event Notices (TENs) for similar events without complaint. However, the Sub-Committee was not satisfied that the application would avoid negatively impacting the licensing objectives. They noted that the proposed licence would significantly widen the scope and scale of licensable activities, potentially permitting large numbers of people on the premises daily. Concerns were raised about the cumulative impact on the heavily residential area, particularly late in the evening, and the potential for patrons to remain in the area after leaving. Despite the applicant's willingness to modify conditions, including capping larger events, the Sub-Committee concluded that the application presented a real likelihood of impact upon the surrounding neighbourhood and therefore refused the application.

Lebanese Grill, 80 Brick Lane, London E1 6RL

The Sub-Committee refused the application for a new premises licence for Lebanese Grill. The application sought authorisation for late-night refreshment from Sunday to Thursday until midnight, and from Friday to Saturday until 2:00 am. Objections were received from the Licensing Authority, Environmental Health, SPIRE, and local residents, all citing concerns related to the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and the potential for public nuisance and crime and disorder. The applicant's agent, Mr. Christopher Montanez, highlighted that the premises had operated under Temporary Event Notices (TENs) without specific complaints and that the upstairs flats were unoccupied. However, the Sub-Committee was not persuaded that the applicant had rebutted the presumption against granting licences in the CIZ. They noted the applicant's previous unlicensed trading on two occasions, which demonstrated a lack of trust in their ability to uphold licensing objectives and adhere to conditions. The Sub-Committee also considered the potential for noise from customers, delivery drivers, and loitering, and concluded that granting the application would undermine the licensing objectives and add to the cumulative impact in the area. The application was refused.