Hedley [2003] NZLLA 838 (6 November 2003)

Last Updated: 24 January 2012

Decision No. PH 838/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by EMMA HEDLEY 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 NEW PLYMOUTH on 28 October 2003

APPEARANCES

Miss E Hedley - applicant
Sergeant M P Prendergast - NZ Police - in opposition
Mr M E Clearwater - New Plymouth District Licensing Agency Inspector - to assist

ORAL DECISION BY THE AUTHORITY

[1] The object of the Sale of Liquor Act is to establish a reasonable system of control over the sale and supply of liquor to the public with the aim of contributing to the reduction of liquor abuse so far as that can be achieved by a legislative means.

[2] One of the ways of achieving that objective is to ensure that all managers of licensed premises have high standards on both sides of the bar. They are the people who are to be on duty at all times when liquor is being sold. They are ultimately responsible for compliance with the Act and the conditions of the licence.

[3] When Parliament passed the Sale of Liquor Amendment Act 1999 it emphasised the fact that the manager had to be on duty when liquor was being sold to the public. The reasoning behind the amendment was to encourage the drive to raise the standards of those charged with the responsibility of supplying liquor to the public. The expectation was that management of licensed premises would be conducted by persons of integrity, committed to supervising the sale and supply of liquor, and concerned to give a meaning to the term ‘host responsibility’. The ultimate aim was to achieve the Act’s objective of reducing the incidents of liquor abuse.

[4] This is an application for a General Manager’s Certificate. The issue concerns the example set by managers of licensed premises. The case highlights the issue of whether it is possible to impose on others the virtue of self restraint when the lack of it is not regarded seriously by a potential manager.

[5] Miss Emma Hedley is the applicant. She comes before the Authority with a good report from the District Licensing Agency Inspector. She has had nearly eight years experience in the industry. She has been working at licensed premises known as “The Ugly Duck” in New Plymouth for 18 months. She is the maitre’d and has been in charge of several evening shifts. Her employer believes she is mature, honest, reliable, polite and sensible. She has been appointed as a temporary manager from time to time of those premises. The premises are not regarded by the Police as problem premises in the city. Miss Hedley has completed a course of training with the local Polytechnic.

[6] The Police quite properly have brought to the Authority’s attention, a period of time between 1998 and 2001 where Miss Hedley showed a lack of responsibility combined with over consumption of liquor. The offending to some extent may have resulted from an unhappy relationship. Miss Hedley was quite young. She was just 18 or so when she first came to the attention of the Police. Her first convictions were on 9 February 1998, and resulted in convictions for assault, wilful damage and disorderly behaviour. On that occasion she was fined and placed under supervision. The Police have given evidence of her behaviour at the time of the arrest and this was repeated shortly afterwards, and resulted in a further conviction for wilful damage.

[7] On 13 January 2001, Miss Hedley was arrested and convicted of disorderly behaviour. This was now some two and a half years ago. At the time Miss Hedley was described as being intoxicated. There followed some three incidents involving her relationship with her then partner. There were incidents which again involved the use and abuse of liquor.

[8] The Police basic report was that when effected by liquor Miss Hedley gave an illustration that she displayed obnoxious behaviour. Their concern was that in a bar setting with easy access to alcohol, such behaviour could be repeated.

[9] To some extent the application has been overtaken by time. The application was filed one year ago. In the interim period, Miss Hedley has established that she has not only been able to maintain and hold down a good job, but she has been free of any concerns from the Police.

[10] Miss Hedley has given evidence. She says she is in a different relationship now. She has the responsibility for a child, and she has certain clear aims and ambitions to do well in her life. She accepts that at the time she was immature and stupid, and she says that she has grown up, and has a much better lifestyle at present. She accepts that if she does consume too much alcohol, then she has an inclination to lose her temper and behave badly. As a consequence, she says she no longer drinks to excess at all. She certainly does not drink at work. The indications from the District Licensing Agency Inspector is that she no longer drinks to excess.

[11] In looking at the matter in the round, it seems to us that in view of the fact that any manager’s certificate is for one year, this may be the time when Miss Hedley should be given the opportunity to show that she has put the past behind her, and is able to move forward. We note that a pattern of offending has developed. It was stated in G L Osborne LLA 2388/95:

Without fettering ourselves in this or other applications it may be helpful if we indicate that we commonly look for a five years period free of any serious conviction or any conviction relating to or involving the abuse of alcohol or arising in the course of an applicant’s duty on licensed premises.

[12] In view of the positive aspects of this application, we are prepared to reduce that period to three years. That having been said it is the decision of the Authority to adjourn this application for six months. That gives a further period of monitoring for Miss Hedley’s conduct of the licensed premises. It means that by the time six months has elapsed, at least three years will have passed since the last conviction. If Miss Hedley is able to be conviction free and incident free for that period of time, then we believe that it is appropriate that her application be granted. She can of course be appointed as a temporary manager in the meantime.

[13] The decision therefore is to adjourn the application to receive further reports. If there are no further untoward or adverse incidents, the application will be granted on the papers. If there are, a further public hearing may be necessary.

[14] The application is adjourned accordingly.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 6th day of November 2003

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Hedley.doc(afw)