LICENSING AND APPEALS SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Licensing and Appeals Sub-Committee held on 8
February 2012 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at
10.00am.
1
Sub-Committee
Mr B Smith (Chairman)
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Mr R Reynolds
Officers in Attendance:
The Legal and Democratic Services Manager, the
Licensing Manager, the Licensing Administrator and the
Democratic Services Team Leader (MMH)
Also in Attendance:
The Applicant and the Applicant’s solicitor, Cllr R
Shepherd (Observer)
APOLOGIES
None received.
2
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received.
3
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
4
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
Members decided that they wished to go into Private session for item 5 and to hear
fully from the Applicant and consider matters in confidence.
RESOLVED
That under S100 A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be
excluded from the meeting for Agenda Item No 4 on the grounds that it involved the
likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of
Schedule 12 (a) of the Act.
5
APPLICATION FOR NEW RIDING ESTABLISHMENT LICENCE
The Applicant was present. She was accompanied by her solicitor.
The Chairman introduced the Panel and Officers. The Legal and Democratic
Services Manager explained that there was an issue regarding the Sub Committee’s
jurisdiction to hear the matter. This needed to be settled before the Hearing could
commence.
The Applicant’s solicitor referred to an email sent to the Licensing Manager on 7
February 2012. The Licensing Manager had been out of the office, had not seen the
email until 9.15 am on 8 February 2012 and had, therefore, not had opportunity to
forward it to Members in advance. Copies of the email were produced and given to
the Sub Committee as well as an email sent by the Applicant’s solicitor to the
Licensing Manager on 1 February 2012. The Legal and Democratic Services
Licensing Sub-Committee
8 February 2012
Manager reminded the Applicant’s solicitor that it was his duty to produce documents
if he wished them to be used in support of the Applicant’s case. The Applicant’s
solicitor asked that Members should read the emails before he made his submission.
The Legal and Democratic Services Manager advised that, in terms of process, it
made no difference if they were read before or after the submission. Members
agreed to hear the submission first.
The Applicant’s solicitor drew the attention of Members to the issue date of the
Applicant’s previous licence which was 26 April 2011 and to the relevant section of
the Riding Establishment Act 1964. The Licensing Manager explained that the
licence was granted on 30 June 2010 but, because of necessary checks including a
vet’s report, it was not issued until 26 April. Correspondence sent to the Applicant
had made it clear that her licence was due for renewal at the end of June 2011.
The Sub Committee retired at 11.10 am to consider whether to hear the matter and
returned at 11.55 am.
The Chairman stated that the Sub Committee had considered the representations
and documents submitted by both the Council and the Applicant’s solicitor. The Sub
Committee considered that the licence which covered the period 1 July 2010 to 30
June 2011 granted to the Applicant was clear and unambiguous. The Sub Committee
noted the representations from the Applicant’s solicitor in relation to the Riding
Establishment Act 1964.
However the Sub Committee considered that the licence was granted in accordance
with the Applicant’s requirements and consequently expired on 30 June 2011.
Therefore the Sub Committee would need now to consider the application for the
Riding Establishment licence.
The Applicant’s solicitor requested an adjournment. The Legal and Democratic
Services Manager advised that a formal decision needed to be made before the
Applicant’s solicitor could obtain further advice. The Sub Committee therefore
proceeded to hear the matter.
The Licensing Manager explained that the Applicant’s last licence had expired on 30
June 2011 and that the application submitted on 4 October was considered to be a
new application. The paperwork had been incomplete and, despite reminders, the
required information had not been received until 16 December 2011 on which date
the application was deemed to be valid. There was no requirement in law for this type
of application to be consulted upon by the public or other authorities but the Council
was required to receive and consider a report from an authorised veterinary surgeon.
The report had been supplied to the Sub Committee.
Officers had some concerns about the operation of the riding establishment,
including the fact that it was largely staffed by volunteers, and were not minded to
exercise their delegated powers but to refer the matter to the Sub Committee.
The Applicant put her case. She had been running the establishment for 30 years
and had a licence on a yearly basis. She was assisted in running the establishment
by family members, including her daughter-in-law who was a fully qualified riding
instructor, and volunteers. The volunteers were all experienced riders and had been
helping for many years. For the past year the Applicant also had a work experience
student from Easton College. In the summer, when the establishment was busy, the
Applicant employed additional paid help. Only the experienced riders took people out
on the road. Children remained on the premises. The establishment was used by
Licensing Sub-Committee
8 February 2012
casual and repeat customers. Casual and new customers were always assessed for
competence.
In response to a question from Mr B Smith, the Applicant’s solicitor said that the
Applicant conceded that her management of the paperwork had not been
satisfactory. She apologised for the delay and would deal with it more promptly in
future.
Responding to a question from Mr R Reynolds the Applicant explained that
arrangements for the welfare of the horses were in place for when the family was
away for the day. She said that the horses were unshod until summer, when they
went out on the road, and that her own vet had advised that the horses didn’t need to
be vaccinated.
Members retired at 12.40 pm to consider their decision and returned at 13.20 pm.
The Chairman announced that the Sub Committee, having heard representations
from the Licensing Officer, the Applicant and the Applicant’s solicitor and reading the
documentation provided to the Panel had
RESOLVED
that the licence application be granted with the standard conditions for the period 8
February 2012 until 7 February 2013.
The reasons for the decision were that the licence granted to the applicant for the
period 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011 had expired, the current licensing application was
valid and the Sub Committee considered that the requirements of the Act had been
met.
The meeting concluded at 13.25 pm.
___________________
Chairman
26 March 2012
Licensing Sub-Committee
8 February 2012