Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club Incorporated, re [2007] NZLLA 164 (1 March 2007)

Last Updated: 24 February 2010

Decision No. PH 164/2007

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by KIHIKIHI RUGBY SPORTS CLUB INCORPORATED pursuant to s.64 of the Act for renewal of a club licence in respect of premises situated at Herbert Street, Kihikihi, known as “Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club”

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

Chairman: District Court Judge E W Unwin
Member: Ms P A Ballard

HEARING at TE AWAMUTU on 15 February 2007

APPEARANCES

Mr G Thomson and Ms D Smith – on behalf of applicant
Mr K J Tutty – Waipa District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] Before the Authority is a routine application for the renewal of a club licence issued to the Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club Incorporated.

[2] This club has been licensed for many years and the club licence became due for renewal on 13 August 2006. The club has the right to sell liquor on Mondays to Thursdays 7.00 pm to 11.00 pm, Friday 5.00 pm to 12.00 midnight, Saturdays and public holidays 11.00 am to 12.00 midnight, and Sundays 11.00 am to 10.00 pm. These hours are standard for clubs of this nature. No changes were sought to the conditions of the licence.

[3] There was no opposition to the application from the reporting authorities. However an objection was filed by a neighbour alleging improper use of the club’s premises. The particulars relate to allegations of excessive noise, late night or early morning drinking on the premises, and unacceptable traffic movements. The District Licensing Agency Inspector wrote a very comprehensive report in which he pointed out that a number of the allegations were unsubstantiated. He stated that the club had been made aware of the concerns in order that steps would be taken to ensure that undue disturbance was not caused to neighbouring residents. The Inspector pointed out that the Waipa District Council had resolved the complaints through the RMA noise control provisions. He said the Council could only act on complaints that have been received and the Council had done so. The Inspector was satisfied that a warning to the club in terms of noise control measures was quite sufficient, and that if necessary, a suspension application could be brought if the complaints continued.

[4] As it happens the objector was written to to see whether a public hearing was necessary. No reply was received. However in the meantime a search of the register of incorporated societies had revealed that the club had been struck off in 2002. In other words the entity to which the licence was originally issued no longer exists.

[5] Accordingly the matter was set down for a public hearing to see if these matters could be resolved. At the hearing the club was represented by Ms D Smith the chairperson of the club together with Mr G Thomson the treasurer. Mr Tutty as the District Licensing Agency Inspector appeared in an assisting capacity.

[6] The club pointed out that there had been an increase in interest with the activities of the club. The number of junior teams had been increased, and the club supports two senior teams and four junior teams. A touch rugby team has become part of a new initiative and the club is looking at bringing in a netball team as well. All and all, and with the benefit of voluntary hard work, the club continues to exist, and was very keen to have its application granted, and the licence renewed.

[7] There has been a further technical difficulty involving the renewal process. It appears that the application for renewal may have been received after the expiry date of the licence. However we are satisfied that this was an administrative error which does not reflect on the club’s suitability and in the circumstances a waiver is granted.

[8] Taking into account the criteria in the Act, we are satisfied that the club’s licence should be renewed for a period of three years. Although there has been an objection lodged the objector has failed to appear in support of the objection and accordingly, such objection must carry little weight, if any. It certainly has no probative value in the light of failure to appear to answer any questions.

[9] The club has pointed out that it has a requirement to provide three sets of audited accounts plus a membership list and the constitution before it can be reinstated back on the register. The annual general meeting is on the 25th of this month and the club anticipates having its affairs in order within a month. In the circumstances we propose to adjourn the application for a period of six months. The club may continue to trade in the meantime. If we can be satisfied through the District Licensing Agency that the club has been reinstated on the register, then we propose to renew the licence for a period of three years, on the papers. If on the other hand further problems arise involving the legal existence of the club as an incorporated society, a further public hearing may be necessary.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 1st day of March 2007

Judge E W Unwin Ms P A Ballard
Chairman Member

Kihikihi Rugby Sports Club.doc(aw)