Newman, re [2008] NZLLA 1739 (12 December 2008)

Last Updated: 12 February 2010

Decision No. PH 1739/2008

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by JOSHUA DAVID NEWMAN pursuant to s.118 of the Act for a General Manager's Certificate

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

Quorum: Ms J D Moorhead
Mr P M McHaffie

HEARING at AUCKLAND on 25 November 2008

APPEARANCES

Mr J D Newman – applicant
Sergeant J P Loye – NZ Police – in opposition
Miss S Kotecha – Auckland District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Joshua David Newman for a General Manager's Certificate pursuant to s.118 of the Act. The application was dated 23 May 2008.

[2] The criteria to which we must have regard are set out in s.121 of the Act as follows:

(a) The character and reputation of the applicant:

(b) Any convictions recorded against the applicant:

(c) Any experience, in particular recent experience, that the applicant has had in managing any premises or conveyance in respect of which a licence was in force:

(d) Any relevant training, in particular recent training, that the applicant has undertaken and evidence the applicant holds the prescribed qualification required under section 117A:

(e) Any matters dealt with in any report made under section 119.

[3] The application was opposed by the Police as the applicant has convictions and active charges recorded against his name. At that time he was due to appear in the Auckland District Court on 29 July 2008 for assault.

[4] Sergeant Jason Peter Loye gave evidence for the Police in regard to the vetting procedures that had been carried out under the Act. Mr Newman was identified as having previously received a s.106 discharge for careless driving in 2004 and he had been given diversion for possession of cannabis in 2006.

[5] It was also identified that Mr Newman was facing active charges for common assault for which he was to appear in the Auckland District Court. The victim identified in this matter was the cousin of the applicant.

[6] On 3 October 2008 when the matter was called in the Auckland District Court the victim indicated that this was a family issue which had since been resolved. The charges were dismissed due to the victim failing to give evidence.

[7] Mr Newman appeared and gave evidence. He said that he is no longer employed by Shoot for the Stars Limited which was referred to in his application but that he is now working as a bartender at the "Jervois Steakhouse" in Ponsonby Road, where he has been for the last four months. His employer is now the Nourish Group. We note however that there is no reference provided on the file from his current employer.

[8] The applicant is the holder of the Licence Controller Qualification. In an interview with the Inspector he displayed a satisfactory knowledge of his responsibilities under the Act.

[9] The applicant declared no convictions on the application form. This was correct as the charges had either been withdrawn, dismissed or diverted. Given that there are no convictions recorded against the applicant the matter that we are concerned with is that of the character and reputation of the applicant, as well as any matters dealt with in any report made under s.119 of the Act.

[10] In the main the applicant fulfils the criteria, the matters referred to being somewhat historical. In the case of the cannabis possession, Mr Newman has confirmed that cannabis is no longer a part of his life.

[11] We have however said previously that certificates are not issued in a vacuum and that we would expect the support of an employer before a certificate can be issued. In the current circumstances we propose to adjourn the matter for six months during which time the applicant is to provide a reference from his current employer. If there are no further matters from the authorities within that time then the certificate may be issued on the papers.

[12] If however there are any further matters then a further hearing will be necessary. In the meantime we see no reason why the applicant could not be appointed as a temporary or acting manager if required, provided the provisions of ss.128 and 129 of the Act are carried out.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 12th day of December 2008

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Joshua Newman.doc(aw)