Lewes District and Eastbourne Borough Councils' logo

Lewes and Eastbourne
Councils

Agenda item

Application for the variation of a Sexual Entertainment Venue Licence, Lux, 2a-2b Pevensey Road, Eastbourne, BN21 3HJ

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed everyone. All parties present introduced themselves and the Chair detailed the procedure to be followed and asked if there were any representations to vary it. There were none.

 

Counsel for the Applicant, Mr James Rankin, declared he would be speaking on behalf of the Applicant, Mr Forte.

 

The Specialist Advisor presented a report which outlined the application and highlighted relevant policy considerations.

 

The Chair invited Members and then the Applicant and Mr Rankin, to ask questions of the Specialist Advisor. There were none.

 

Mr Rankin, Counsel, representing the applicant, addressed the Sub Committee.

 

Having noted that no objections to the application had been received, Mr Rankin focussed on addressing considerations pertaining to the Council’s own Policy.

 

Points put forward for consideration included:

·       That Mr Forte’s history of owning the adjacent nightclub demonstrated a well run establishment.

·       That the investment in the nightclub had led to an increase of investment and overall improvement to the area

·       That the Police traditionally welcomed such establishments, as high levels of management help to ensure avoidance of public disorder.

·       That the variations being requested were in line with national trends and customer expectations around full nudity and that the Council’s policy had become outdated in this area.

·       That the current licence conditions had deterred national companies who would otherwise have been interested in operating the premises.

·       That the club would be appealing to the same customer profile as identified in the Council’s Tourism Policy (those aged 35+ with disposable income).

·       That historically the 1 metre distance rule between dancer and customer had been shown to be difficult to enforce and difficult to evidence. Mr Rankin suggested that nationally, the stipulation now was for ‘no physical contact’ and further argued that this ‘simpler’ version was in line with advice from the Home Office and that the current Licence already had this stipulation (Condition 8) in place.

 

In summary, Mr Rankin said that the request for variations to the Licence brought the conditions in line with current expectations and norms, as outlined earlier.

 

The Chair invited Members to ask questions of Mr Rankin.

 

Councillors asked a number of questions and Mr Rankin replied, referring and expanding on the points of argument laid out in his addressing remarks.

 

Regarding questions about the variation for full nudity, Mr Rankin explained that his client had been unable to open and create a ‘track record’ because potential operators were not interested if they were unable to meet market expectation for full nudity. To operate the premises himself, his client would be faced with the same barrier to business success.

 

Regarding questions about the loss of the 1 metre rule distance rule, Mr Rankin argued that any safeguarding rule needed to be practical and enforceable to have meaning and cited legal best practice and Home Office advice to argue that the ‘No Touching’ condition was an easier and clearer cut rule to enforce, which was why other Councils had removed this clause.  It was still important to remove the 1 metre distance rule as fewer conditions was best practice and it left the potential for a £20k fine. Mr Rankin confirmed that the ‘No Touching’ rule would be clearly displayed at the entrance and around inside the premises, including on the tables, and also from staff, including door staff and CCTV.

 

The Chair invited the Applicant and Mr Rankin to make any closing remarks (maximum 2 minutes). Mr Rankin declared they had covered all the points in their earlier address. 

 

The Sub Committee members retired at 6.42pm to consider and determine the application. Michele Wilkinson as Legal Adviser was in attendance to assist with any legal queries.

 

Having taken into account all the relevant considerations, the Sub Committee returned to the meeting at 7:12pm and announced the decision as follows:

 

RESOLVED: That the application to vary the licence be approved, as set out in the attached Decision Notice document (Minutes Appendix 1).

Supporting documents: