DECISION SHEET LONDON BOROUGH OF HOUNSLOW

Licensing Panel - Wednesday, 20 November 2024 Published on 26 November 2024

Contact: Jane Medici on 020 8583 5793 or email [email protected]

ITEM SUBJECT DECISION

2. Appointment of Chair Cllr Aftab Siddiqu iwas appointed Chair. He thanked Councillors Cllr Madeeha Asim and Junue Meah for
their attendance.

3. Cineworld Cinema, Unity

Square, Hounslow Notification of decision following a Licensing Panel hearing to determine an application for the
grant of a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003

PREMISES: Cineworld Cinema, Unity Square, Hounslow TW3 1EL

APPLICANT: Cineworld Holdings Limited (Company number 05212440)

TAKE NOTICE THAT on Wednesday 20th November 2024 following a hearing before the Licensing and
General Purposes Sub Committee (the “Licensing Panel” or “Panel”),

HOUNSLOW COUNCIL, as the Licensing Authority for the Premises RESOLVED that:

the application for the variation of a premises licence for Cineworld Cinema, Unity Square, Hounslow
TW3 1EL (the “Premises”) is GRANTED subject to the modifications and conditions stated below:

REASONS:

1. The Panel convened to determine an application by Cineworld Holdings Limited (Company number
05212440) (the “Applicant”) to vary the existing premises licence for the Premises under the
Licensing Act 2003.

2. The Premises is a cinema situated in a development consisting of commercial units on the ground
with residential flats above them. The Premises are currently licenced for the playing of films, plays,
live music and recorded music, as well as for the provision of late-night refreshment and the sale of
alcohol for consumption on the premises. A copy of the existing licence and the licensable hours
and opening hours is shown as Appendix B to the Agenda (the “Existing Licence”).
3. The application, a copy of which is shown as Appendix A, sought to vary the premises licence to
extend the hours for the licensable activities and opening hours as follows:

Supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises:

Monday to Sunday: 11:00 to 02:00 (the following day)

Plays, films, live music, recorded music (indoors):

Monday to Sunday: 24 hours

Late night refreshment (indoors):

Monday to Sunday: 23:00 to 05:00 (the following day)

Hours premises are open to the public:

Monday to Sunday: 24 hours

The application also included proposed conditions to be added to the Premises Licence.

4. The hearing was held in-person before a 3-Member Licensing Panel. All Members of the Licensing
Panel were in attendance throughout the hearing, and during deliberation which took place in a
closed session.

5. The Licensing Panel carefully considered all the relevant information including:

 Written and Oral representations by all the parties

 The Licensing Act 2003 and the steps appropriate to promote the Licensing Objectives
 The guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (the “Statutory
Guidance”)
 Hounslow Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy 2020-2025 (the “Council’s Policy”)
 The Human Rights Act 1998

6. During the consultation period representations were received from seven parties, all of whom were
local residents and their representations were shown as Appendix C. Another resident submitted
some questions, which were responded to by the Applicant, and which was shown as Appendix D.
The representations raised a number of issues, with the main issues falling under the prevention of
crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance objectives. Representations were made
about noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour that the residents said they had experienced due to
the cinema and its customers.
7. The Applicant was represented by their Solicitor, Mr Taylor, and the Manager for the Premises was
also in attendance, although he did not speak. A number of the objectors were also present.

8. Mr Taylor stated that the Applicant was not seeking to operate 24 hours a day but had made this
application to give flexibility to their performance schedules and to spread out their showings during
the day. In particular, he reiterated comments made in the application that the cinema shows, a
number of Bollywood and Telugu films that had long running times, sometimes with an intermission,
and that they could not be put on at a late time slot as the film would not finish before the end of
their licensing hours. It was stated that they liaised with the Police before making their application,
who had suggested some additional conditions if they wanted to operate later, which the Applicant
had agreed to and as a result of which the Police had not made a formal representation. As for the
extended alcohol licensing hours, he stated that the primary intention of going to the cinema is to
watch films, not to drink.

9. In relation to some of the specific incidents raised by the objectors, Mr Taylor informed the Panel
that they had checked their records and on the day it was reported people were sitting outside the
cinema at 2.00am, the Premises had been closed for about 1 ½ hours that day and on another
dates the Premises were still open, and therefore he did not consider these issues to be associated
with the Premises. On the 26th September 2024, when fireworks were let off in the area outside the
Premises, the cinema was holding a preview showing of Devara and the fireworks had nothing to do
with Cineworld Mr Taylor went on to say that the Premises will be launching another Bollywood film
next month and so they would be bringing in additional security for that event, with bag searches.
Furthermore, most cinema tickets were now bought online, which enabled the venue to better
anticipate expected numbers for future showings. It was also stated that the Premises had
sometimes operated longer hours under a temporary event notice without any problems.

10. The objectors, several of whom stated they also attended the Premises and were generally
supportive of the Premises and local businesses, felt that it would be the presence of the Premises
that was attracting these customers in the first place, and that they had not felt that the Applicant
had done much, if anything, to deal with their customers. They stated the incidents on the 26th
September 2024, when fireworks were let off outside the Premises, supposedly by customers of the
Applicant, caused a lot of alarm to local residents as in addition to the noise nuisance, some of the
fireworks went in the direction of their flats and even though the Police attended no one did anything
to stop the people involved or move them on. The feeling was that the Applicant had relinquished
any responsibility for this incident as well as in dealing with people coming to the area to visit the
Premises. It was stated that residents were experiencing nuisance on a regular basis and that
complaints had been made to their managing agents about the issue.
11. Questions were raised about the extended alcohol hours and how the limitation of 2 alcoholic drinks
per customer would be supervised, and the Panel was informed that the Applicant had a tried and
tested method of allocating paper tickets to customers wanting to have alcohol and stamping the
tickets when they were given a drink. Mr Taylor confirmed this could mean someone who was not
drinking could use their ticket to buy alcohol for someone who was, but he again stressed that
drinking alcohol was not the primary purpose for people going to a cinema.

12. Furthermore, the additional conditions include a requirement to ensure customers dispersed from
the area, and that they used SIA staff. The objectors raised concerns as to whether the requirement
for at least one SIA staff would be enough, although the Panel notes that the proposed conditions
included a requirement on the DPS to carry out a risk assessment for further SIA staff.

13. The Applicant noted that the Premises were in the Council’s Cumulative Impact Area, but they had
not believed that the application together with the additional conditions, would add to the cumulative
impact.

14. The Statutory Guidance states that:

“2.15 The 2003 Act enables licensing authorities and responsible authorities, through
representations, to consider what constitutes public nuisance and what is appropriate to
prevent it in terms of conditions attached to specific premises licences and club premises
certificates. It is therefore important that in considering the promotion of this licensing objective,
licensing authorities and responsible authorities focus on the effect of the licensable activities
at the specific premises on persons living and working (including those carrying on business) in
the area around the premises which may be disproportionate and unreasonable. The issues
will mainly concern noise nuisance, light pollution, noxious smells and litter.

15. As stated by Mr Taylor, none of the Responsible Authorities had submitted a representation in
respect of this application, and it was stated that the Applicant had liaised with the Police, who,
according to the Statutory Guidance, the Licensing Authority would look to as the main source of
advice on crime and disorder. On the other hand, one of the objectors informed the Panel that he
had also spoken to the Police (apparently the same Officer who liaised with the Applicant) who
supposedly advised him to attend the hearing and put forward his objections.

16. With regard to the additional conditions in the application, these would only come into effect on days
when the licensable activities were scheduled to finish after 02:30 in the morning, which was
considerably into the more sensitive hours of the day when the Statutory Guidance says any
 appropriate conditions should be focussed upon. This means that if the Premises were scheduled
to close at 02:29 in the morning, you could have customers leaving the Premises from 23:00 at night
to 02:29 in the morning without any requirement on the Applicant to have a SIA guard, or to ensure
customers dispersed and did not loiter in the area. The Panel noted the arguments from both
sides, with the Applicant denying there was any evidence that its customers were responsible for
any of the noise nuisance and ASB, and the objectors saying they believe its customers were
responsible for this and that they regularly experienced issues. In the Panel’s opinion, with the
Premises located adjacent to residential tower blocks, if customers left the Premises in the early
hours there was a real risk this could cause noise nuisance to residents in those flats. The Panel
considered that the additional conditions proposed by the Applicant should take effect from an
earlier time and with the Licensing Authority’s Policy having a core hours policy that has a
termination time of 00:00 on Friday and Saturday, the Panel believed this would be a reasonable
time from which the Applicant’s proposed conditions should take effect.

17. Whilst customers could also cause problems as they dispersed down nearby roads, the Statutory
Guidance is clear that the Applicant is only responsible for customers in the immediate vicinity of the
Premises. The Existing Licence already contained conditions for CCTV and for signage asking
customers to leave the area quietly.

18. It was noted during the hearing that one of the additional conditions to come into effect after 02:30
would be for there to be at least one SIA security staff member on duty after 20:00 until closing.
However, if the Premises were to remain open for 24 hours, that would mean the Premises would
not be “closing” and would be required to have at least one SIA staff member from 20:00 on day 1
and the entirety of day 2 until the Premises actually closed on whichever day that was. Mr Taylor
noted this oversight and suggested that in that case, the SIA could remain on duty until 09:00 the
following morning.

19. Whilst not addressed during the hearing, a similar problem concerning a lack of a termination time in
situations where the Premises remained open for 24 hours also arose with the Applicant’s other
proposed conditions regarding dispersal of its customers that would take effect “once the premises
is closed”. Therefore, if a variation was granted, the Applicant’s proposed conditions would need to
be amended to provide for a termination time for the same where the Premises are scheduled to
remain open for 24 hours. With the Applicant suggesting that where the Premises remain open for
24 hours the requirement for the SIA staff member could end at 09:00 the following day, the Panel
considered this same time would be an appropriate end time for the other proposed conditions.

20. If the time from which the additional conditions come in to effect was brought in from midnight rather
than 02:30 and the proposed conditions modified to take account of the situation where the
 Premises remain open for 24 hours, then the Panel was of the view that this would not add to the
cumulative impact in the area, and the conditions would also be sufficient to support the licensing
objectives.

21. Having taken all matters into account the Panel therefore decided to GRANT the application for a
premises licence, amended as follows:

Supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises:

Monday to Sunday: 11:00 to 02:00 (the following day)

Plays, films, live music, recorded music (indoors):

Monday to Sunday: 24 hours

Late night refreshment (indoors):

Monday to Sunday: 23:00 to 05:00 (the following day)

Hours premises are open to the public:

Monday to Sunday: 24 hours

The following additional conditions to apply only when licensable activities are scheduled to
finish after 00:00:

1. At least one SIA trained security officer will be on duty after 20:00 hours until closing or
until 09:00 the following day, whichever is the earlier, and further SIA trained staff will be
deployed at the discretion of the DPS.

2. The DPS will be responsible for carrying out a risk assessment for the need for further
SIA staff.

3. The DPS and staff will be responsible for making sure their customers leave and disperse
the area from 00:00 to 09:00 the following day, or until and including when the premises
is closed, whichever is the earlier.

4. After 20:00, the premises will implement a method to ensure customers may not
purchase more than two alcoholic drinks per person.

Right to Appeal
22. Any party aggrieved with the decision of the Licensing Panel on one or more grounds set out in
schedule 5 of Licensing Act 2003 may appeal to the local Magistrate’s Court within 21 days of
notification of this decision.