Decision No.
182
NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL
LICENSING PANEL B
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1. Date of Hearing
28 April 2009
2. Panel/Committee
members present
Councillor Grocock (Chair)
Councillor Wildgust
Councillor James
Ann Barrett
3. Legal Advisor
4. Declarations of
interests by
members and
officers
None
5. Applicant:
Mr Anthony Cardova Bartley
6. Nature of
Application
New Personal Licence
7. Parties /
Representatives and
witnesses present
For the Applicant
No one was in attendance
Witnesses given
permission to speak
None
Witnesses refused
permission to speak
and reason why
None
Responsible
Authorities
Nottinghamshire Police represented by Helen Guest
Witnesses given
permission to speak
Witnesses refused
permission to speak
and reason why
None
None
1
8. Parties/witnesses
not present and
reason why
Mr Bartley had indicated on the notice which he had served under
Regulation 8 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations
2005 that he did not intend to attend the hearing
9. Applications and
The Application proceeded in Mr Bartley’s absence under
Decisions on
Regulation 20 (1) of The Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings)
ancillary issues e.g. Regulations
requests for
adjournments;
determinations
whether to proceed
in absence;
directions etc
11. Written
Representations
and supplementary
material taken into
consideration
12. Agreed Facts
13. Facts/Issues in
dispute
Issue 1


Application of Mr Bartley dated 10 March 2009;
Representation under the Licensing Act 2003, submitted
on behalf of Nottinghamshire Police including the Record
of Conviction detailed on the Police National Computer;
NB whilst Mr Bartley had sent in an undated letter this had not
been served on the Police and did not contain information which
the Panel found relevant to the issue and was not therefore
considered.
None
Whether the public should be excluded during part or all of the
hearing of this matter under Regulation 14 of the Licensing Act
2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005.
Issue 2
Whether, by virtue of the relevant conviction, the granting of the
application would promote the crime prevention objective in the
circumstances of the case.
Relevant Legislation
Part 6 (especially section 120) and Schedule 4 to the Licensing
Act 2003
Relevant Guidance
Guidance issued by the Secretary of State pursuant to Section
182 Licensing Act 2003 Chapter 4, (especially paragraph 4.9).
Relevant Policy
Statement of Licensing Policy paragraphs 9.29 to 9.32 and Policy
APP 4.
14. Decision
The Panel found as follows:With regard to Issue 1 - no members of the public were in
attendance and it was therefore unnecessary to exclude the
public from the hearing.
2
With regard to issue 2 - the application should be refused
Reasons:In reaching its decision the Panel had regard to section 120 (7)
(b) of the Licensing Act 2003, which stated that having regard to
any objection notice served by the Police, the licensing authority
must reject the application if it considered it necessary for the
promotion of the crime prevention objective and in any other case
it must grant the application.
Regard was also had to policy APP 4 which required
consideration to be given to certain matters when considering the
application. It was noted that there was only one conviction
before the Panel and that that conviction would become spent in
December 2009.
Paragraph 4.9 of the Guidance indicated that where an applicant
is able to demonstrate that the offence in question took place so
long ago and that they no longer have any propensity to re-offend
a licensing authority might consider that the risk to the community
is so diminished that it is right to grant the application.
Mr Bartley had chosen not to attend the hearing and his letter did
not indicate whether there were any mitigating circumstances
surrounding the offence, or an understanding as to the relevance
of his conviction to his personal licence application or how that
would affect the promotion of the Prevention of Crime objective.
The Police had submitted that they had spoken to Mr Bartley
regarding the offence and that he had indicated that he had no
excuse for committing the offence in question.
In the absence of Mr Bartley addressing the issues identified
above and in the light of the Police submissions, the Panel were
satisfied that this was a serious offence and did not feel that it
could be satisfied that the Prevention of Crime and Disorder
objective would be promoted if the application were to be
granted, not withstanding the age of the conviction and the fact
that there was only one relevant conviction to be taken into
account.
The application was therefore refused.
Signed: Cllr B Grocock
Dated: 28/4/09
3