Richards, re [2008] NZLLA 1709 (9 December 2008)

Last Updated: 12 February 2010

Decision No. PH 1709/2008

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by ANTHONY ROBERT RICHARDS 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: Dr J Horn

HEARING at CHRISTCHURCH on 2 December 2008

APPEARANCES

Mr P J Norcross – for applicant
Sergeant A J Lawn – NZ Police – in opposition
Mr M Ferguson – Christchurch District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an unusual application by Anthony Robert Richards for a General Manager's Certificate. The application was filed with the Christchurch District Licensing Agency in May of this year.

[2] Mr Richards is a mature individual who has for the last three years worked on a part time basis for a licensed restaurant in Christchurch. He has been asked to step up in terms of his responsibilities and apply for a General Manager's Certificate. He duly obtained the Licence Controller Qualification, and presented that with his application, as well as supportive references as to his character and reputation.

[3] Mr Richards was required to declare previous convictions and did so. The convictions relate to 48 charges which were laid against the company known as 3A Training Company Limited. The charges included such matters as failing to file annual income tax returns for the four years to 31 March 2007, and 44 charges of applying PAYE deductions for a purpose other than payment to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue for the 44 months between March 2004 and October 2007.

[3] Mr Richards has personal charges against him for aiding and abetting the company to commit the various offences. Mr Richards was not a shareholder or director of the company but he handled the financial affairs of an associated company for many years. He had therefore continued to accept responsibility for aspects of the company decision-making, including discharging its obligations to the Inland Revenue Department.

[4] Mr Richards promptly pleaded guilty to all the charges. He was convicted and sentenced to 120 hours of community work (which have been completed), and ordered to pay reparation of $6,355, most of which has now been paid. The convictions naturally resulted in adverse reports from the Police, and the matter came before us by way of a public hearing.

[5] In all other respects there is no doubt that Mr Richards would make an excellent manager. The guideline decision as to how to deal with convictions is G L Osborne LLA PH 2388/95. In that decision the Authority said:

"Without fettering ourselves in this or other applications, it may be helpful if we indicate that we commonly look for a five year period free of any serious conviction or any conviction relating to or involving the abuse of alcohol or arising in the course of an applicant’s duty on licensed premises."

[6] This is very much a balancing matter. It could be said that the charges themselves are quite serious. On the other hand it needs to be made quite clear that Mr Richards gained no personal advantage from trying to help this company. He has explained how he continued to tried to keep it from being liquidated but in the end the circumstances overwhelmed his efforts.

[7] The final matter is that there were no liquor abuse issues at all. There are unlikely to be liquor abuse issues at the premises where Mr Richards intends to use his certificate. There is no doubt that he is a valuable member of society. However, the position is that every decision we make acts as a precedent for other decisions.

[8] The issue is one of suitability. Generally speaking the practice has been to require applicants to have a period of time known as a stand-down period or a conviction-free period where they can show that these are isolated offences that are unlikely to be repeated. A trouble free period of time gives credibility to the statement that the experiences in the past have resulted in a decision to lead a much more prosocial lifestyle.

[9] Doing the best we can we have decided that it would be inappropriate and unreasonable to decline the application. We think that there should be some further time given that it is now just 12 months since the last part of the offending took place.

[10] In all the circumstances we have decided that the application will be adjourned for a period of nine months. At the end of that period we will call for further reports. If there is nothing adverse from those reports we intend to grant the application on the papers without any further hearing. We think it is appropriate that in the last three months of that adjourned period, Mr Richards be appointed as a temporary manager or acting manager from time to time, provided the provisions of ss.128 and 129 of the Act have been adhered to. In that way he will gain further worthwhile experience towards the eventual achievement of the certificate.

[11] The application is adjourned accordingly.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 9th day of December 2008

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Anthony Richards.doc(aw)