Clifford [2003] NZLLA 957 (15 December 2003)

Last Updated: 26 January 2012

Decision No. PH 957/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by STANLEY DAVID TREVOR CLIFFORD 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 AUCKLAND on 8 December 2003

APPEARANCES

Ms S D T Clifford - applicant
Mr R Hunt - Auckland District Licensing Agency Inspector - to assist
Mr R Poole - NZ Police - in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] Before the Authority is a further application by Mr S D T Clifford for a General Manager’s Certificate. This is the second application to be heard this year. The first application was considered by the Authority some five months ago. On that occasion the Authority commented on the two convictions which had been incurred by Mr Clifford in February 2001, and July 2001. One conviction related to the possession of drugs for supply, and the Authority noted that Mr Clifford had been around drugs since he was five years of age, and had been using cannabis since he was 13. That is for the last ten years. In its earlier decision the Authority described Mr Clifford’s attitude towards the drug as “relaxed”.

[2] The Authority’s second concern related to a conviction for 24 charges of using a document. This had resulted in a repayment order for $10,000. The Authority was concerned that no regime had been put in place for the repayment of this money. Mr Clifford appeared to blame others for that not happening.

[3] We commented in our oral decision that in view of Mr Clifford’s relaxed attitude towards cannabis, and the fact that there had been no confirmed regime for the repayment of the reparation, we were not prepared to grant the application at that time. We said that Mr Clifford was welcome to reapply once he had established where he stood with the use and abuse of cannabis. We indicated that we were not prepared to licence general managers who may have more than a passing acquaintance with the drug. We also indicated that Mr Clifford was welcome to reapply once he had established a regime for repaying the reparation.

[4] Mr Clifford made a second application about six weeks later. He provided a letter in which he said that he did not have any involvement with cannabis, and disputed the Authority’s finding that he had a relaxed attitude towards the drug. He said that his attitude towards cannabis had changed dramatically since his conviction in February 2001. At the time of the first application, Mr Clifford still had the support of the licensed premises known as “The Palace”, and deductions for the reparation had commenced at the rate of $40 per week. The first payment was due on 23 July 2003, with the last payment due on September 2009.

[5] The Police expressed concerns that the only evidence about the use of cannabis was a self reporting statement by Mr Clifford. The Police suggested that he could undertake a drug counselling course. The suggested that provided he maintained voluntary reparation payments for three months, and undertook to use his managers certificate only for “The Palace” tavern, then the application may well be granted.

[6] Mr Clifford has given evidence today. He stated that he checked out three organisations which provided drug abuse counselling. One had a four month waiting list, the other required a payment of $480.00, and the third stated that Mr Clifford was probably unsuitable because they had a waiting list for people who actually did have a problem with drug abuse addiction. Mr Clifford took the view therefore that he had done what was required of him.

[7] Regrettably the matter has been overtaken by further events. Mr Clifford no longer has a job in the industry. He stated that he was working at a day time job, which required that he have his manager’s certificate. He said he is no longer employed, and there is no further reparation being made. He appears to indicate that if he were to be able to be granted a General Manager’s Certificate, that he might well get employment. He said that he found it difficult to get a bar job because of the convictions.

[8] It is an unsatisfactory state of affairs, and it is difficult to establish the truth one way or another. Mr Clifford still seems to have a relatively relaxed attitude towards his responsibilities. To us he appears to put the blame for the state of affairs on others rather than himself.

[9] The Authority has indicated in the past that it does not grant General Manager’s Certificates so that persons may use them as a bankable resource, or to enable them to obtain employment. We have indicated that to do so is tantamount to giving a reference to a person without knowing whether that person would live up to such a reference. Mr Clifford needs to be in the industry, and he needs to have the committed support of an employer.

[10] If evidence was produced as to the difficulties he has had with obtaining counselling or treatment for drug abuse, or if there was some independent evidence that this was not an issue, it may be that the Authority could have relaxed its earlier decision. But that course is no longer available to us. We should add of course that we were somewhat surprised to find that an application had been made so soon after the last decision of the Authority.

[11] It is a matter of some regret that the Authority finds that it cannot grant the application at this time. For the reasons we have given, it is refused.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 15th day of December 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

Stanley Clifford.doc(afw)