Scott, re [2003] NZLLA 320 (9 May 2003)

New Zealand Liquor Licensing Authority

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

---

Scott, re [2003] NZLLA 320 (9 May 2003)

Last Updated: 18 March 2010

Decision No. PH 320/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by TIMOTHY CHARLES SCOTT pursuant to s.118 of the Act for a General Manager’s Certificate

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

HEARING at GISBORNE on 28 April 2003

APPEARANCES

Mr T C Scott – applicant
Mrs K A Sykes – Gisborne District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist
Constable R Akuhata – NZ Police – in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Timothy Charles Scott for a General Manager’s Certificate.
[2] There are a number of criteria which must be considered by this Authority in making a decision on the application. These criteria are listed in s.121 of the Act. They are:

(a) The character and reputation of the applicant:

(b) Any convictions recorded against the applicant:

(c) Any experience, in particular recent experience, that the applicant has had in managing any premises or conveyance in respect of which a licence was in force:

(d) Any relevant training, in particular recent training, that the applicant has undertaken and any relevant qualifications that the applicant holds:

(e) Any matters dealt with in any report made under section 119.

[3] It is fair to say that Mr Scott satisfies all the criteria except item (b). There are no concerns about his character or reputation. He is a relatively mature 34 year old. He has had recent experience in the conduct of licensed premises and has been working both part-time and full-time at “Scotty’s Bar and Grill” in Gisborne. He has also helped with an off-licence known as “Merchants of the Southern Skies”. He has completed relevant training under the Act, and he made a good impression on the Authority when he gave evidence. He has had a 15 year history in retail, and carried out other forms of employment as well as having worked for the last two years from time to time at licensed premises. During that time he has also assumed the responsibility of being a temporary manager.
[4] On 24 August 2002 Mr Scott drove into town to get a meal. The place that he normally eats at, had closed. He started drinking, and then drove home. He was subsequently rung by a person who himself had become intoxicated, and asked to be picked up. He then drove and was apprehended. He showed a breath alcohol level of 632 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. The Police quite properly brought such matter to our attention. It is a very recent conviction, although there is no question that it is an isolated event. Clearly the lesson has been learned.
[5] Mr Scott is aware of the Authority’s general guidelines concerning such incidents. We have said in the past, in particular in relation to the decision of G L Osborne LLA 2388/95, that isolated events may be looked at less seriously when it comes to considering an application for a General Manager’s Certificate. Normally speaking, the Authority would look for a period of two years during which an applicant would be conviction free.
[6] In this case we are prepared to be slightly more lenient in view of Mr Scott’s general maturity, and his previous good record. Mr Scott has suggested that everybody may make a mistake from time to time. The issue may well be whether they learn from such a mistake, and move on with their greater acquired experience and knowledge.
[7] Mr Scott gave illustrations to the Authority as to how he deals with the problem of liquor abuse. We are satisfied in general that he would be a welcome addition to the hospitality industry. Nevertheless, the conviction is recent. In all the circumstances we have decided to adjourn these proceedings for 12 months.
[8] This has an advantage for Mr Scott because from time to time he can be employed as a temporary manager. It has an advantage from our point of view because during the next 12 months he may well be monitored. If, after 12 months there have been no other incidents involving either his private life or his management of licensed premises, then we would be prepared to grant the application on the papers. A period of 12 months would only take him to a period of a little over 18 months from the date of the conviction, but in the light of his maturity, and the other positive features in the application, we regard that period as long enough.
[9] This application is adjourned accordingly.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 9th day of May 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

tcscott.doc(aw)