A controversial licence application for a late-night takeaway on Brick Lane has been refused, with councillors citing concerns over public nuisance and the applicant's past compliance issues.
Lebanese Grill Express, located at 80 Brick Lane, had applied for a new premises licence to serve late-night refreshments until 2 am on Fridays and Saturdays, and midnight on other nights. The application also included non-standard timings for bank holidays and New Year's Eve.
Objectors, including Tower Hamlets Council's Licensing Authority and Environmental Health department, raised significant concerns about the premises' location within the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone (CIA). They argued that the proposed hours were well beyond the council's framework hours and could exacerbate existing issues of public nuisance, noise, and potential anti-social behaviour.
Tower Hamlets Council has established specific framework hours for takeaways within the Brick Lane CIA to manage these concerns. These hours are: Monday to Thursday: 06:00 hrs to 23:30 hrs; Friday and Saturday: 06:00 hrs to 00:00 hrs (midnight); and Sunday: 06:00 hrs to 22:30 hrs.
The CIA is particularly concerned with preventing crime and disorder, public nuisance, and public safety. Specific issues include noise disturbance from patrons dispersing, accessing and leaving the venue, and delivery drivers congregating with idling vehicles. There is also a concern about potential anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance to local residents from customers consuming takeaway food late at night, especially after drinking.
During the licensing sub-committee hearing, concerns were also raised about the applicant's history of operating without the necessary licences. The Licensing Team highlighted instances of trading without a licence on at least two separate occasions, which demonstrated a lack of trust in their ability to adhere to regulations.
Environmental Health officers echoed these concerns, emphasizing the potential for noise disturbance from customer access and egress, as well as loitering, particularly given the proximity of residential properties above the takeaway.
Regarding the flats above the takeaway, the applicant's representative clarified that they are leased by the applicant and currently unoccupied. They further stated, The upstairs flat is currently owned under the lease of the applicant, so there is no residence living above. There's no residence living on the stage right, so to speak, as I believe that's a temporary hotel. And on the left-hand side, I believe it's a set of offices. So, again, there's no residence in the immediate vicinity upstairs, left and right of the premises.
The applicant's representative argued that the premises had operated under Temporary Event Notices (TENs) without specific complaints and that proposed conditions would ensure responsible operation. These TENs had covered 15 trading days until 3 in the morning.
However, the Licensing Authority noted that these TENs did not cover a full-time licence all year round and that there had been issues with the application process for the TENs themselves. The applicant also mentioned an instance of unlicensed provision of late-night refreshments on 15th November 2024 due to a miscommunication about a rejected TEN application.
Beyond CCTV and incident logs, the applicant proposed several conditions to ensure responsible operation. These included customer notices requesting patrons to respect residents when leaving, clear signage for drivers to close windows and lower music volume, and providing contact details for residents to report noise issues. The applicant also committed to regularly checking and clearing waste from the front of the premises, taking steps to disperse loitering individuals, and serving all takeaway food closed or wrapped to discourage immediate consumption.
However, the sub-committee ultimately refused the application, concluding that the applicant had not sufficiently demonstrated that granting the licence would not add to the cumulative impact in the Brick Lane area. The decision was also supported by evidence of planning enforcement notices and a previous planning appeal decision against the premises.
The sub-committee noted that while a resident who had initially objected had withdrawn their concerns, the Licensing Authority and Environmental Health maintained their objections. The applicant's history of operating without the required licences was a significant factor in the refusal.
Further details on the licensing application and the council's considerations can be found in the Public reports pack for the Licensing Sub Committee meeting on 16th July 2026.
