Andrew [2003] NZLLA 971 (16 December 2003)

Last Updated: 26 January 2012

Decision No. PH 971/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by CASSIE FAYE ANDREW 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 9 December 2003

APPEARANCES

No appearance by or on behalf of applicant
Mr R B Hunt - Auckland District Licensing Agency Inspector - in opposition
Mr R G Poole - NZ Police - in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Cassie Faye Andrew for a General Manager’s Certificate. At the time when she made her application in January 2003, Ms Andrew was employed at “The Oval” in Ponsonby. She produced a short reference from that licensed premises confirming that she had worked there since the previous August. It was submitted by the managing director of “The Oval” that Ms Andrew had the maturity and attitude to work at managerial level.

[2] Ms Andrew completed a course of training with Hospitality Management Consultants Limited, and produced a further reference as to her character and reputation. The application was opposed by the Police on the basis that Ms Andrew had failed to disclose reasonably serious convictions. She had referred to a speeding ticket which had been incurred in October 2002, but neglected to mention that on 12 July 2000 she had been placed on activity order and supervision by the Youth Court for a period of six months. This sentence was imposed in respect of four charges of common assault, as well as one charge of assaulting a person with a blunt instrument.

[3] It could well be, because the matters were dealt with in the Youth Court, Ms Andrew decided that they were not regarded as convictions. However, the applicant has not appeared to support her application or to explain the omission. As the Inspector has pointed out it is now some three and a half years since the convictions, and it may well be that if Ms Andrew was able to show that she was still working in licensed premises, the application could have been granted. We note that Ms Andrew has worked at other licensed premises over the last three years.

[4] In cases where there is no appearance to support the application, the Authority really has no alternative other than to decline it, on the basis that there are too many unanswered questions.

[5] In this case we draw the inference that Ms Andrew has no wish to follow up the application, and accordingly, it is refused.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 16th day of December 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

Cassie Andrew.doc(afw)