Stevens [2003] NZLLA 988 (18 December 2003)

Last Updated: 27 January 2012

Decision No. PH 988/2003

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by DANIEL JOHN ANTHONY STEVENS pursuant to s.123 of the Act for a renewal of 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 10 December 2003

APPEARANCES

Mr D J A Stevens - applicant
Mr R B Hunt - Auckland District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist
Mr R G Poole - NZ Police - in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Daniel John Anthony Stevens for the renewal of his General Manager’s Certificate. Included in the criteria to which this Authority must have regard in considering such an application, are the convictions recorded against the applicant since the certificate was issued or last renewed, and the applicant’s character and reputation.

[2] There are no issues about the way in which the applicant, Mr Stevens, has managed the sale and supply of liquor pursuant to the licence with the aim of contributing to the reduction of liquor abuse.

[3] Mr Stevens was first granted his General Manager’s Certificate on 19 August 1999. It was then renewed on or about 19 August 2000 for three years. Over the last two years Mr Stevens has become the duty/bar manager at “Degree Gastro Bar”, which is a busy inner city bar situated in the Viaduct Basin. Mr Stevens is fortunate that his immediate employer Mr J Halibrakers has seen fit to come to support him. Mr Halibrakers regards his employee as honest, reliable and trustworthy if not hard working, and said that he would not have made the effort to have come before the Authority unless he thought that Mr Stevens’ continued employment as a manager was important.

[4] When Mr Stevens made his application for the renewal of his manager’s certificate, he disclosed that he had been convicted for drink driving on 1 May 2003. What he failed to disclose was that on 22 August 2001, there was another conviction for similar offending.

[5] Mr Stevens has attempted to explain why the other conviction was not disclosed, and it may be that he is entitled to what we see as a ‘slim’ benefit of the doubt. The fact remains that there have been two convictions for breaching the law in this way, since the certificate was last renewed. The position has been aggravated by the fact that there is a very historical conviction back in 1991. The levels on the two occasions in 2001 and 2003 were 785 and 607 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath respectively.

[6] There is no question but that in this particular case there were extenuating personal circumstances which might well have lead a person to use alcohol as a crutch. Mr Stevens had personal issues to deal with. He had counselling through Victim Support for a period of three months. It is probable that both convictions arose from the personal issues to which reference has already been made. Mr Stevens was well aware of the objective of the Act, and has indicated he has the support of his employer. He appears not to have a problem with liquor abuse despite the convictions. He certainly gave an indication to the Authority that he is not in any way dependent on the drug.

[7] Both reporting agencies have correctly pointed out to us that had Mr Stevens been applying for a new manager’s certificate, it is probable that he would have been stood down for a minimum of two, and possibly three years. The Inspector and representative from the Police have suggested to the Authority that this is a case where the application for renewal should be refused.

[8] We have considered the matter, and there have been discussions with the applicant and his employer. The applicant has made an offer voluntarily not to use his General Manager’s Certificate for a period of two months. In those circumstances that will be seen as a penalty, as well as a reminder of his own responsibilities. It is also a considerable inconvenience to the employer.

[9] In the light of that offer, we are inclined therefore to grant the application, particularly as had the reporting agencies been aware of the convictions, then applications under s.135 for the suspension of the General Manager’s Certificate would have been brought. Had they been brought, it is probable that a period of two or even three months suspension would have been imposed.

[10] In the end it is a balancing exercise. In this particular case we have taken into account the maturity of the applicant, the support that he has, and the reasons which led him to take the actions which he did.

[11] On the undertaking given by Mr Stevens that he will not utilise his General Manager’s Certificate for a period of two months from 15 January 2004, the application for renewal of the General Manager’s Certificate will be granted.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 18th day of December 2003

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member Daniel Stevens.doc(afw)