Winslow, re [2008] NZLLA 12 (11 January 2008)

Last Updated: 15 February 2010

Decision No. PH 12/2008

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by RAYMOND EDWARD KENT WINSLOW 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 P M McHaffie

HEARING at AUCKLAND on 18 December 2007

APPEARANCES

Mr R E K Winslow - applicant
Sergeant B R Law - NZ Police - in opposition

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Raymond Edward Kent Winslow for a General Manager’s Certificate.

[2] The application was filed with the District Licensing Agency in early November 2007. The application has been given urgency because of the fact that the company with which Mr Winslow is associated, (and which is operated by his father), is about to take over licensed premises in Great Barrier Island known as the “Port Fitzroy Boating Club”. We understand that an on-licence operates within this club. We further understand that the company which Mr Winslow’s father operates is taking on the catering contract. The proposal is that Mr Winslow Junior, because of his experience in the liquor industry, will be responsible for the sale and supply of liquor on the premises.

[3] Mr Winslow has had a reasonable amount of experience in managing licensed premises. He has in fact held a General Manager’s Certificate in the past, although this was for an off-licence and was not renewed. He is currently working at licensed premises known as the “Shakespeare Hotel” in Auckland, and he has also worked in other licensed premises.

[4] When he made his application, Mr Winslow disclosed previous convictions involving drink driving and disqualified driving.

[5] The evidence shows that Mr Winslow is just 21 years of age. His date of birth is 25 July 1986. On 10 November 2005 in Thames he was apprehended for driving with excess breath alcohol content. The level was 365 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. Because Mr Winslow was under 20 years of age at the time, he was duly charged and convicted.
[6] The conviction occurred on 16 December 2005 in the Thames District Court. A week later Mr Winslow was apprehended for driving while disqualified and also for driving with excess breath alcohol content. The level on the second occasion was 594 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.

[7] Mr Winslow was again convicted in January 2006. He was disqualified for a period of six months and ordered to complete community work.

[8] The circumstances of the two charges do not reflect great credit on Mr Winslow. As the Police have pointed out, to receive two convictions within such a short period of time, shows immaturity and a careless attitude towards responsibility.

[9] Because of Mr Winslow’s age, Police have considerable concern about his ability to run an on-licence, particularly given their view of the drinking culture on Great Barrier Island.

[10] On the other hand, it appears that the company will be limited in its ability to employ a suitably qualified manager. We believe, however, that given the apparent status of the licence, it will be necessary for the company to have a manager on duty at all times when liquor is being sold.

[11] We refer to the guideline decision of Graham Lesley Osborne LLA 2388/95. That decision sets out the way in which previous convictions should be approached. To some extent we have also taken into account Mr Winslow’s age. The Authority’s policy is that serious convictions should warrant a five-year, conviction-free stand-down period. On the other hand isolated offences might warrant a two-year conviction-free period. These conviction-free periods are designed to enable a person to show that he or she has learnt from the errors of the past ,and is able to apply that experience in a leadership capacity. In particular, we expect that applicants with liquor abuse convictions show that they are capable of setting an example to their patrons, as well as ensuring their safety.

[12] Where there are two convictions, the normal policy that we have adopted is to require a person to show a conviction-free period of three years.

[13] Clearly, Mr Winslow has not reached that stage at this time. On the other hand, in the light of the evidence that we have heard, we have decided not to decline the application at this time. We are prepared to give Mr Winslow an opportunity to prove himself.

[14] The application will be adjourned for the maximum period of 12 months. Over the next 12 months it may be that Mr Winslow can be appointed as a temporary manager, provided the provisions of sections 128 and 129 of the Act have been complied with. In other words, the company must employ a certificated manager. If that manager becomes unavailable for any reason, then it may well be that Mr Winslow can be appointed in his place.

[15] Over the next 12 months we will have an opportunity, as will the monitoring agencies, of gauging Mr Winslow’s performance. He will have the opportunity of showing that he has learnt from the mistakes of the past.

[16] After a period of 12 months have elapsed, and if there are no other adverse reports, then we will be prepared to grant the application on the papers without a further public hearing. On the other hand, if there are any other matters that arise, then either the application will be declined, or a further public hearing will be necessary.

[17] The application is adjourned on those terms.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 11th day of January 2008

______________________
B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Winslow.doc(cm)