Nicol, re [2003] NZLLA 93 (28 February 2003)

New Zealand Liquor Licensing Authority

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

---

Nicol, re [2003] NZLLA 93 (28 February 2003)

Last Updated: 20 February 2010

Decision No. PH 93/2002

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by UILI ELISARA 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 WELLINGTON on 28 February 2002

APPEARANCES

Mr U Elisara – in person
Mr R S Putze – Wellington District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist
Senior Sergeant G D Logan – NZ Police – in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Uili Elisara for a General Manager's Certificate.

[2] When the application was made, the applicant ticked the box in item 2(d) of the application form, which indicated he had not been convicted of any offence.

[3] The Police, as they are required to do, received the application. They then checked on Mr Elisara's convictions. They discovered that the applicant in fact had four previous convictions.

[4] The first of those was recorded in 1990 where a minor assault resulted in a conviction and an order to come up for sentence if called upon. There were three convictions in 1995. The first of those was in December when the applicant was convicted for having an excess of breath alcohol content while driving. The level was 505 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. He was also convicted for failing to give name and address on demand. On both matters he was fined and disqualified. The fourth matter occurred in 1995, some short time afterwards. The applicant was convicted and fined $200 for driving while disqualified. He was disqualified for six months.

[5] The Police noted that the offences occurred almost seven years ago. They wrote a letter to the applicant in which they advised of their concern that the information on the application form was incorrect. They invited the applicant to approach the Police. They indicated that they would reconsider their opposition if a reasonable explanation was received. In the event, there was no contact.

[6] The applicant has given evidence before us today. He confirmed that he has completed a course which was paid for by his employer. He confirmed that he has been working for Starmart since June 2001. It is clear that he is not only a responsible but also a valuable employee. He has had sole charge of the premises. There are no concerns from the District Licensing Agency Inspector.

[7] The applicant apologised for the omission in the application form. He said that when he looked at the form, he believed that one had to be sentenced to imprisonment before one could be said to have a conviction. He thought that paying fines was not as serious. It was his belief that offences resulting in fines would not be classified as convictions.

[8] After hearing from him, the Authority had no difficulty in accepting that explanation. The Police, having heard the explanation, withdrew their opposition.

[9] In those circumstances, the application for a General Manager's Certificate is now granted.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 8th day of March 2002

Judge E W Unwin J C Crookston
Chairman Member

uelisara.doc (nr)