The Licensing Sub-Committee of Enfield Council met on Wednesday 15 July 2026 to consider an application for a new premises licence for Union Bar & Restaurant. The meeting's agenda focused solely on this application, with no other substantive items scheduled for discussion.

Application for a New Premises Licence: Union Bar & Restaurant

The primary item scheduled for discussion was an application for a new premises licence for Union Bar & Restaurant, located at 56 Aldermans Hill, London, N13 4PP. The report pack detailed the history of the premises, noting that a previous premises licence, LN/202400475, had been granted on 2 December 2024 but was subsequently revoked on 11 February 2026 following a review application by Enfield Council's Licensing Authority. The grounds for the review included alleged breaches of licence conditions and permitting smoking in substantially enclosed areas, contravening the Health Act 2006 and associated regulations. The revocation was not appealed.

The current application was submitted on 11 May 2026 by Ms Elsa Budani, who is also the proposed Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS). The application sought to allow for opening hours from 06:00 to 22:00 daily. The proposed hours for the supply of alcohol for on-premises consumption were initially sought from 10:00 to 22:00, but were amended to 10:00 to 21:30 following mediation with Licensing Enforcement. Off-sales of alcohol were sought from 10:00 to 22:00 daily. The report indicated that the premises had undergone refurbishment, including the removal of a recessed frontage area.

The premises is situated within the Palmers Green Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ), an area designated by the London Borough of Enfield's Licensing Policy Statement¹ due to existing concerns regarding crime and disorder, public nuisance, and public safety. The application received representations from ten Other Parties (OP1 to OP10), all objecting to the application on grounds related to the four licensing objectives. These representations highlighted a documented history of non-compliance at the premises, concerns about antisocial behaviour, intimidation, and congregation in the locality, and the potential reintroduction of previous disorder and management failings. Specific concerns were raised about noise, late-night disturbance, smoking in inappropriate areas, obstruction of the highway, and the impact of late-night activity on families.

Licensing Enforcement had initially proposed conditions in response to the application, which the applicant agreed to, leading to Licensing Enforcement withdrawing their representation. These agreed conditions, detailed in Annex 4 of the report pack, covered various aspects including restrictions on adult entertainment, the involvement of Mr Armando Roci, prohibition of live music, controls on alcohol consumption outside the premises, litter management, staff training, a Challenge 25 proof of age scheme, and the operation of a CCTV system.

The report pack also outlined relevant legislation, including the Licensing Act 2003, and guidance from the Secretary of State. It emphasised the four licensing objectives: the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance, and the protection of children from harm. The report noted that representations consistently referred to the premises' history of non-compliance and revocation, ongoing concerns about antisocial behaviour, and the potential for nuisance. The cumulative impact of licensed premises within the Palmers Green CIZ was a significant consideration, with a presumption against granting new licences unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposal will not add to existing problems.

The report presented the Sub-Committee with several options: to grant the licence as amended, grant with modified hours, activities, or conditions, exclude licensable activities, or refuse the application. The key question for determination was whether the applicant had demonstrated that granting the licence would not add to the existing cumulative impact in Palmers Green and would promote the licensing objectives, taking into account the premises' recent history.

The report also included details of nearby licensed premises and the application form submitted by Ms Elsa Budani, detailing her proposed operating schedule and the activities she intended to provide. The Other Party Representations section contained detailed objections from local residents, councillors, and the Green Lanes Business Association (GLBA), all raising concerns about the premises' history, its location within the CIZ, and the potential for increased crime, disorder, public nuisance, and public safety issues. These objections frequently referenced the previous revocation of the licence and alleged a continuity of management or ownership, raising doubts about the applicant's ability to operate responsibly.