Jiang, re [2003] NZLLA 274 (17 April 2003)

New Zealand Liquor Licensing Authority

[Index] [Search] [Download] [Help]

---

Jiang, re [2003] NZLLA 274 (17 April 2003)

Last Updated: 9 March 2010

Decision No. PH 274/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by FIONA JIANG pursuant to s.18 of the Act for renewal of an on-licence in respect of premises situated on the Ground Floor, 51-75 Webb Street, Wellington, known as “Kitty Café”

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

Chairman: District Court Judge E W Unwin
Member: Mr J C Crookston

HEARING at WELLINGTON on 14 April 2003

APPEARANCES

No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant
Mr M J Kemp – Wellington District Licensing Agency Inspector – in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Fiona Jiang for the renewal of an on-licence in respect of premises situated on the Ground Floor, 51-75 Webb Street, Wellington, known as “Kitty Café”.

[2] The predominant purpose of the business is a ‘BYO’ restaurant with authorised trading hours between 7.00 am and 11.00 pm daily. These hours are dictated by the constraints of the applicant’s lease.

[3] The licence was first issued on 24 August 2001, so this current application represents the first application for renewal.

[4] The criteria which must be considered by the Authority are contained in s.22 of the Act and these criteria are:

[a] The suitability of the licensee:
[b] The conditions attaching to the licence:

[c] The manner in which the licensee has conducted the sale and supply of liquor pursuant to the licence:
[d] Any matters dealt with in any report made under section 20 of this Act.

[5] When the application was first advertised, there were no matters in opposition raised by the reporting authorities. However, four letters of objection were received from occupants of units in the building within which the licensed premises is located.

[6] Discussions took place between the licensee, (through an interpreter), the landlord, the objectors and the Inspector, in a bid to resolve the neighbours’ concerns. The principal issue appeared to be excessive noise emanating from the premises, and allegations that the business had traded after hours in breach of the lease agreement.

[7] In the event, it appears that Miss Jiang subsequently vacated the premises. We have received evidence from Mr Michael John Kemp, a District Licensing Agency Inspector, as to the number of times that he has attempted to contact the applicant, without success. He has confirmed that the premises are currently vacant.

[8] In a letter dated 8 April 2003, the QBA body corporate wrote a letter under the hand of Mr Graham Grieve, the Chairman. Mr Grieve was one of the four objectors.

[9] He confirmed that the premises had now been let to another business. He confirmed that discussions had been held between the landlord and the new business, and the objectors. He indicated that the new business might seek a temporary authority and a liquor licence. He confirmed that the QBA body corporate had no objection to this happening.

[10] The Inspector has not at this time received any application for any temporary authority. It seems to us therefore that the appropriate course of action is to adjourn these proceedings for six months. This will keep the licence on foot in the meantime.

[11] If there are no applications for temporary authority within the next six months, or if a new licence has been granted for the new business, then the current application will be declined on the papers.

[12] If there is a further need for the current licence to remain on foot, then no doubt the Inspector can indicate that to the Authority. If necessary a further hearing will take place.

[13] In the meantime the application is adjourned for six months.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 17th day of April 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

KittyCafe.doc (md)