Skip to main content

Agenda item

Jewel Of London - Passenger Vessel, Millbank Millennium Pier, Millbank, SW1

App

No

Ward/ Cumulative Impact Area

Site Name and Address

Application

Licensing Reference Number

2.

Vincent Square Ward / not in cumulative impact area

Jewel Of London - Passenger Vessel, Millbank Millennium Pier, Millbank, SW1

New Premises Licence

17/00773/LIPN

 

 

 

Minutes:

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE No. 1

Thursday 23rd March 2017

 

Membership:            Councillor Angela Harvey (Chairman), Councillor Jan Prendergast and Councillor Shamim Talukder

 

Legal Adviser:           Horatio Chance

Committee Officer:   Tristan Fieldsend

Presenting Officer:  Sumeet Anand-Patel

 

Relevant Representations:    The Metropolitan Police.

 

Present: Mr Gareth Hughes (Barrister, Representing the Applicant), Mr Robert Cairns and Mr John Williams (Applicants), PC Bryan Lewis (The Metropolitan Police (“The Police”).

 

 

Jewell of London Passenger Vessel, Millbank Millennium Pier, Millbank, London, SW1P 4QP

17/00773/LIPN

 

1.

Live Music – Indoors and Outdoors

 

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The Sub-Committee was due to consider an application by London Party Boats Ltd for a new premises licence in respect of the Jewel of London – Passenger Vessel, Millbank Millenium Pier, Millbank, London, SW1P 4QP.

 

With the agreement of all parties it was decided to hear applications 17/00773/LIPN and 17/00570/LIPN at the same time as they related to the same applicant.

 

The Sub-Committee was informed that additional information relating to both applications had been submitted by the Police. The applicant confirmed that he would like to address the Sub-Committee concerning the extra information submitted.

 

Mr Hughes, representing the applicant, confirmed he had seen an email from the Police containing the additional information but was unaware of any further information submitted. Mr Hughes confirmed an incident had occurred on 22 March 2017 and the Sub-Committee could decide to adjourn the meeting to allow further information to be submitted. If the Sub-Committee was minded to adjourn it was requested that this be for a short period of time only as it could have potential damaging financial impact on the applicant, Mr Cairns’ business. Mr Hughes explained that Mr Cairns was the joint owner of three boats, two were currently in dry dock and the Jewel of London was currently operating under Temporary Event Notices (TENS). This was the case as the boat had originally been licenced by Southwark London Borough Council for the previous fourteen years but the licence had recently been declared void as it related to an area outside Southwark.

 

Mr Hughes informed the Sub-Committee that a cordon on a certain section of the River Thames had been implemented due to the Westminster terror attack on 22 March 2017. Mr Cairn’s boat was moored within the cordon but he required his boat to undertake a booking and discussed his situation with the Police present on the river. Mr Cairns stated that the Police escorted him to his vessel and he then proceeded to manoeuvre it outside of the cordon, with the Police’s permission, in order to reach Putney where the party who had booked the boat could embark.

 

Mr Cairns confirmed that he was aware a cordon was in place from Vauxhall Bridge to Charing Cross Bridge and explained how the Police escorted him to his vessel at approximately 17:00 hours and gave him permission to pilot the vessel outside of the cordon. Once the party had embarked at Putney the boat travelled down to Vauxhall Bridge where the boat temporarily entered the Police cordon in order to turn around. He said it was believed this was allowed as boats were not permitted within the cordon to transit but Mr Cairns was simply turning his vessel around. The Sub-Committee was advised by Mr Cairns that this manoeuvre had to take place within the cordon for safety reasons as it was unsafe to do it elsewhere at this point of the river due to the tide. Mr Cairns confirmed that the passengers were still currently on-board at this point.

 

Mr Hughes stated that the passengers were then disembarked at Putney and M Cairns chose to return to Millbank Pier to disembark the crew. When Mr Cairns moored the vessel at Millbank the Police then radioed to ask why he had entered the cordoned off area. It was explained it was to allow staff to disembark and go home. The alternative would have been to leave the vessel afloat somewhere else outside the cordon as he no prior permission to legally moor elsewhere. The Sub-Committee was informed that Mr Cairns would be unable to moor his vessel at another pier without being in attendance on the vessel. Mr Cairns stressed that as the Police were happy for him to pilot the vessel outside of the cordoned area he was of the opinion that they would not have a problem with him re-entering the same area to moor. After the Police had told him to leave the area he informed the Police that he was already moored and explained the situation to them following which Mr Cairns believed he had left them on good terms. In response to a question Mr Cairns explained that he did not think he needed to contact the Police before entering the cordoned off area due to having previously entered it to remove his vessel.

 

Mr Hughes informed the Sub-Committee that there were extenuating circumstances surrounding this incident.

 

PC Lewis, representing the Metropolitan Police, confirmed that there was currently limited information available regarding the incident and was awaiting the statement from the Police Officer concerned. With the agreement of all parties PC Lewis read out the email from the relevant officer confirming the nature of the incident.

 

Mr Hughes confirmed he had seen the email regarding the incident. The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Cairns allocation of TENS had been used up and if it was minded to adjourn the application it would have to be heard in the near future due to financial pressures for the business.

 

After careful consideration of the matter the Sub-Committee decided that it was in the public interest to adjourn the applications in accordance with regulations 11 and 12 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearing) Regulations 2005, pending further investigations. The Sub-Committee considered the evidence offered by the applicant as to his actions while a cordon was in place on the River Thames from Vauxhall Bridge to Charing Cross Bridge following the Westminster terrorist attack on 22 March 2017. The Sub-Committee confirmed that there was a safe place where he could have moored his vessel outside the cordon but chose to steer the vessel further down the River Thames despite this restriction being in place for a fully justified purpose and reason. Further, the applicant had confirmed that he had made no voluntary contact with the Police prior to bringing his vessel back into the cordon area. The Sub-Committee also duly considered the financial implications on Mr Cairns business as a result of the adjournment, and therefore requested the City Council’s Licensing team facilitate an early hearing date on either 4 April 2017 or 6 April 2017 so as not to prejudice the applicant by way of any unreasonable delay.

 

2.

Recorded Music – Indoors and Outdoors

 

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

3.

Performance of Dance – Indoors and Outdoors

                                                              

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

4.

Anything of a Similar Description – Indoors and Outdoors

 

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

5.

Late Night Refreshment – Indoors and Outdoors

 

Monday to Sunday: 23:00 to 03:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

6.

Sales of Retail by Alcohol – On and Off Sales

 

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

7.

Hours Premises are Open to the Public

 

Monday to Sunday: 07:00 to 01:00

 

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

 

Not applied for.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None

 

 

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

 

The meeting was adjourned (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

 

Supporting documents: