Shadbolt [2004] NZLLA 914 (23 December 2004)

Last Updated: 25 January 2012

Decision No. PH 914/2004

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by PAUL BRIAN SHADBOLT 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 Tuesday 14 December 2004

APPEARANCES

Mr P B Shadbolt - applicant
Sergeant G D Verner - NZ Police - in opposition
Mr R S Putze - Wellington District Licensing Agency Inspector - to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] Before the Authority is an application brought by Paul Brian Shadbolt for a General Manager’s Certificate. Mr Shadbolt is a relatively mature 30-year-old who obtained a General Manager’s Certificate in 1997, but subsequently allowed it to lapse when he took on a chef’s position.

[2] Mr Shadbolt has approximately 18 years experience in the hospitality industry. He has produced two references from two former employers in Oriental Bay, Wellington, and Palmerston North. He has a number of certificates and achievements in the industry, and in particular was granted a training certificate from the Hospitality Trading Company, on 17 May 2004.

[3] The applicant was interviewed by an Inspector and displayed a good knowledge of the Sale of Liquor Act. Accordingly Mr Shadbolt qualifies for a certificate in terms of most of the criteria which are set out in s.121 of the Act. The issue before the Authority relates to his character and reputation, and convictions recorded against him.

[4] When he completed his application in June 2004, he was asked whether he had been convicted of any offence and he said yes. And when asked to supply the details he wrote “speeding fines 2001, DIC-2001, loss of licence 6 months.”

[5] It transpires that Mr Shadbolt has two relevant convictions. The first related to an incident on 15 December 2002. Mr Shadbolt was apprehended about midday on Sunday 15 December 2002, as a result of a driving complaint. An evidential breath test revealed a level of 501 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.

[6] Mr Shadbolt said that he had been at a staff function the night before and believed that he was under the limit when he drove the following day. There is no indication from his current employer or from him, that this was anything but an isolated drink driving matter.

[7] There was a second conviction resulting from an incident on 4 June 2003, when Mr Shadbolt was apprehended for driving whilst disqualified. It is obvious that there were no liquor abuse issues involved at that time.

[8] Mr Shadbolt has given evidence about the lack of detail concerning the convictions. Although not entirely convincing, the explanation is not such as to warrant the refusal of a General Manager’s Certificate. We say this particularly because of the evidence from Mr R T Hart, a director of the company that has recently opened up licensed premises known as “The Rock”. Mr Hart appeared before the Authority and gave evidence. He has known Mr Shadbolt for over five years. Although Mr Shadbolt did not work for him in Palmerston North, they did talk a lot about the industry, and he was very keen for Mr Shadbolt to assist in the running of his new company. Mr Hart believes that Mr Shadbolt displays good judgement. He has never noticed Mr Shadbolt displaying any difficulty in handling liquor. Indeed with the experience that Mr Shadbolt has had in the industry, there are no other matters relating to his ability to manage licensed premises.

[9] In summary therefore the issues relate to the convictions. One of those convictions relates to liquor abuse. The offending occurred some two years ago on 15 December 2002. The Authority has given guidelines in relation to previous convictions. In particular, the leading case of GL Osborne LLA 2388/95 recommends was a period of two offence-free years from the date of conviction. We are more inclined to look to the date of the offending as being relevant.

[10] In all the circumstances Mr Shadbolt’s knowledge and experience of the Act and the support of his employer, have outweighed the negative aspects concerning the convictions, and to a lesser extent, the lack of candour about the full details of those convictions.

[11] Accordingly, we have decided to give Mr Shadbolt the opportunity to step up again in the industry. In doing so, we note that any grant is for 12 months only.

[12] The application is accordingly granted.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 23rd day of December 2004

Judge E W Unwin Mr J C Crookston
Chairman Member

Paul Shadbolt.doc(afw)