Agenda item
Application for a Premises Licence for (German Doner Kebab) 207 Mile End Road, London E1 4AA
Minutes:
Before hearing this application, the Members of the Sub-Committee having noted there were two apparently conflicting applications in respect of the same premises, sought to establish who the Applicant was in each instance and the respective relation to the business of each applicant in relation to these premises – Mr Suhelur Rahman and Mr. Catalin Lonita.
The Chair of the Sub-Committee asked Mr Anthony Edwards who appeared as solicitor for both applicants, whether he wanted to withdraw one of the two applications before the Sub-Committee. Mr Edwards was reluctant to withdraw either application, and said he would prefer if the Members heard both applications before deciding on which should be granted. Mr Edwards explained that one Applicant, Mr Suhelur Rahman was applying for a premises licence on behalf of Interlagos Holdings Limited. Interlagos Holdings Limited had won the franchise rights to operate a German Doner Kebab in Tower Hamlets. Interlagos Holdings Limited was a family run company, who had several business interests in Tower Hamlets but who had never run a food business before. The Company Director for Interlagos Holdings Limited is not the Applicant, but his father, Khalisur Rahman, whilst the Applicant is the leaseholder of the premises.
Mr Edwards said the breaches cited by the Responsible Authorities on page 181-183, were due to the Applicant’s brother, Amanur Rahman who was responsible for the day to day running of the shop at 207 Mile End Road, London E1 4AA. Due to the family having never run a food business before, they were ignorant of the fact that a late night refreshment licence would be required. Mr Edwards said Amanur Rahman acknowledged the mistakes were his responsibility. However since becoming aware that a licence is needed the business has traded for five weekends under a Temporary Events Notice Licence (TENs) with no issues whatsoever.
In response to questions from Members the following was noted:
– It was stated Mr Suhelur Rahman was the leaseholder of the premises, and Mr Catalin Loan Lonita was the manager employed to manage the business.
– In response to why the company was applying for the licence, Mr Edwards stated it was a family run business.
– Mr Suhelur Rehman was asked if he was a manager or employee of the company or was he one of the directors of the Company? Mr Suhelur Rahman said he was a salaried employee of Interlagos Holdings Ltd.
– Mr Mohshin Ali, Senior Licensing Officer confirmed the Company House search did not show Mr Suhelur Rahman as a Director of the company.
– Mr Suhelur Rahman reiterated he was a leaseholder of the building and his father was the director of the company. Mr Suhelur Rahman stated that he was responsible for the day to day decisions in relation to the business and Mr Lonita was employed to oversee the operation of the business.
The Members of the Sub-Committee heard from their legal advisor that it was a concern that two apparently conflicting applications relating to the same premises, by two applicants whose respective roles regarding the business were unclear, meant there was no clear indication as to who was accountable for compliance with licensing requirements in the business. In the event of either application being granted, it was unsatisfactory that there was ambiguity as to who was responsible for compliance. In response to Members’ questions, their legal advisor clarified that a limited company is a distinct artificial person at law from any human party, so it was unclear how Mr. Suhelur Rahman was in any legal position to apply for a premises licence on behalf of a company of which he was not an officer such as a director or company secretary.
The Members of the Sub-Committee heard from their legal advisor that they could adjourn to a later date, and invite Mr Edwards and the applicants in the meantime to reconsider the respective applications, in light of the above concern.
Mr Edwards indicated that if that happened, the same two applications could be presented at that later date without modification.
The Members of the Sub-Committee decided not to adjourn to a later date. However, they would adjourn for a short period today to consider the confusion caused by having two apparently conflicting applications, and two applicants, neither of whom were officers of Interlagos Holdings Limited, the company on whose behalf Mr Suhelur Rahman was making one of the applications.
After the Members of the Sub-Committee returned, Mr Edwards conceded that running the two applications concurrently was confusing, and the role of Mr Suhelur Rahman within the company was unclear. Mr Edwards withdrew Mr. Suhelur Rahman’s application for this reason.
Supporting documents: