Horne v Badger Debt Collection Limited [2003] NZLLA 805 (29 October 2003)

Last Updated: 23 January 2012

Decision No. 805/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application pursuant to s.132 of the Act for suspension of on-licence number 068/ON/21/00 issued to BADGER DEBT COLLECTION LIMITED situated at Eureka-Arcade, 11 The Mall, Queenstown known as “Bardeaux”

BETWEEN ANDREW JOHN HORNE
(Police Officer of Queenstown)

Applicant

AND BADGER DEBT COLLECTION LIMITED

Respondent

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

HEARING at QUEENSTOWN on 16 October 2003

APPEARANCES

Sergeant P R Stratford – NZ Police - applicant
Mr S Stamers-Smith - for respondent

Ms T J Surrey – Queenstown Lakes District Licensing Agency Inspector – in support of applicant

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] On 18 August 2003 an application was filed with the Authority for the suspension of an on-licence issued to Badger Debt Collection Limited trading as “Bardeaux”. The grounds for the application were that the licensed premises had been conducted in breach of the provisions of s.166(1) (sale or supply of liquor to intoxicated persons); Section 167 (allowing persons to become intoxicated); s.168(1)(a) and s.168(1)(b) (allowing intoxication and disorderly conduct on licensed premises). There was also a technical allegation involving signage pursuant to s.115(2) of the Act.

[2] The application detailed no less than 13 incidents between June 2001 and August 2003. Mr Stamers-Smith appeared for the respondent company, and he acknowledged without going into detail that the grounds for the application have been made out, and that a suspension order was desirable. The Authority has always given credit to holders of licences who acknowledge what has happened and are prepared to be cooperative, if not contrite, and reconsider management techniques so that allegations such as these are not repeated. In a recent case the Authority said that a discount of some 30% should be allowed for such circumstances.

[3] We believe that in this case the offer to have the licence suspended is a realistic one. It should be pointed out that where taverns are concerned, any suspension has greater impact than for example a restaurant where the primary purpose of the business is the sale of food. The same argument applies for a supermarket where an off-licence for the sale of wine and beer is secondary, or even an off-licence associated with a tavern. In other words what we are saying is that the proposed period of suspension is not without significance for the respondent company, and reflects a change in attitude to the potential serving of intoxicated persons.

[4] The issue of apprehending those believed to be intoxicated is never an easy one. It is a subjective test. We understand that following the filing of the application, the management of the premises has moved the line so that where there are signs of intoxication, then efforts are made to ensure that harm is minimised, and people are made safe.

[5] In those circumstances, bearing in mind the provisions of the object of the Act and in particular the need to try and reduce forms of liquor abuse, the Authority acknowledges the offer made. On-licence 068/ON/21/00 issued to Badger Debt Collection Limited is suspended for a period of seven days commencing at 6.00 am on Wednesday 5 November 2003.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 29th day of October 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

Badger Debt collection.doc(afw)