Future of Greater Manchester pub in limbo after 'underage drinking' sting and allegations of assaults

A review by the licensing sub-committee was adjourned following two sting operations

A legal row has erupted following an underage drinking sting at a Flixton pub. It comes after a series of incidents, including allegations of three serious assaults, at the Garricks Head pub on Moorside Road, and whether they should affect a review of its licence.

The review by Trafford’s licensing sub-committee, due to take place on Wednesday (November 29), was adjourned until after the New Year, leaving the future of the pub in limbo. This follows two sting operations in which ‘volunteers’ were sent into the pub by trading standards officers in a bid to prove that alcohol was being sold to underage teenagers. The result of these operations are set to determined at a later hearing.

The council’s solicitor James Parry successfully argued for the adjournment after further evidence of 11 incidents - including three serious assaults between June 21 2020 and April 2023 - emerged on Tuesday (November 28) evening. But Piers Warne, the solicitor representing the licensee - pub company Punch Taverns Ltd - argued that the presentation of new evidence at such a late stage was ‘against regulations’.

READ MORE: Huge emergency response and boat units called to canal as two men rescued and taken to hospital

READ MORE: Amber health alert issued for north west England as temperatures set to plunge

He also said that it was not relevant to the grounds on which the trading standards officers made a specific request for a review of the licence - the protection of children from harm. Mr Parry had said that the 11 incidents had been discovered by the council’s community safety officer - who has access to police records - and that the evidence about to be presented to the sub-committee was ‘not complete’.

He told the three sitting councillors on the sub-committee: “You have not seen that evidence, but it’s evidence that would go to show how successfully or otherwise the premises were being run. It would engage the principle of the prevention of crime and disorder and it is information that you should see and be aware of.

“I am aware that my friend [Mr Warne] for Punch Taverns and the designated premises supervisor [the landlady of the pub] object to this evidence being shown to you and will no doubt say it’s too late, and ask why? Well, the reason is that there is no time limit on the presentation of evidence, although it is regrettable the information that was presented to me last night and was only seen first thing morning did not arrive sooner.”

Mr Warne countered: “It’s a fairly pithy observation, but I think it’s important. I’ve been doing Licensing Act hearings since 2005 and never have I had a situation where I’ve heard a submission like this in terms of the reasons why you should accept late evidence. Never.” He said he was pleased to hear that the council’s solicitor accepted that Punch’s evidence was served ‘in good time’.

“The regulations are very clear,” he said. “You cannot be served [with new evidence] at the hearing without the consent of the parties and you won’t be surprised to hear that we do not consent to the evidence being brought before us today being included.”

Mr Warne said most of the alleged incidents took place between 2020 and 2022 although two were in February and April, this year. “There’s not much meat on the bones of what’s being said,” he said.

After a lengthy delay, chair of the sub-committee David Jarman said it had been agreed to adjourn the hearing until the ‘likely’ date of January 15.