Wishart, re [2009] NZLLA 336 (2 April 2009)

New Zealand Liquor Licensing Authority

[Index] [Search] [Download] [Help]

---

Wishart, re [2009] NZLLA 336 (2 April 2009)

Last Updated: 20 March 2010

Decision No. PH 336/2009

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by RACHAEL WISHART 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 HOKITIKA on 19 March 2009

APPEARANCES

Miss R Wishart – applicant
Mr R E Beckett – NZ Police – in opposition
Mr A T O’Connell – Grey District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This is an application by Rachael Wishart for a General Manager’s Certificate.

[2] In considering such an application we are bound to take into account the criteria set out in s.121 of the Act. In this particular case the relevant criteria are Miss Wishart’s character and reputation, and the convictions that have been recorded against her.

[3] She has adequate experience in controlling licensed premises, having been a temporary manager for some months at licensed premises in Greymouth. She is the holder of the Licence Controller Qualification. The Inspector has knowledge of her and believes that she could, if given a chance, carry out the duties of a manager of licensed premises.

[4] Miss Wishart is 23 years of age. She has worked at a variety of licensed premises and wishes to stay in the industry, and if possible be given the responsibility of a managerial role. Her past has not been without indiscretion. In 2007 there were three incidents that impact on her character and reputation and therefore her suitability. She drove with excessive blood alcohol content in March 2007. The level on that occasion was 103 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. She was duly convicted, fined and disqualified. Within a month she had committed two charges of theft for which she was duly fined and ordered to pay reparation of some $700.

[5] Those convictions by themselves do not necessarily indicate a pattern. However, there would have to be a conviction-free period for Miss Wishart to satisfy us that she has learnt from the mistakes in the past, and was able to apply that knowledge in a much more pro-social way. She was reasonably impressive in the witness box. It was for that reason that the Inspector and the Police gave her the opportunity of being a temporary manager after she had filed her application for a manager’s certificate in March 2008.

[6] Regrettably however, she was the temporary manager of licensed premises in Greymouth when the premises were the subject of a controlled purchase operation. She was the person who made the sale to the 17 year old volunteer minors. As a consequence the premises’ licence was suspended for a period of 24 hours. As a result of that Miss Wishart found it difficult at the premises where she was working. She ceased working there and is about to take up employment at licensed premises in Hokitika. She had the opportunity of another position, but because of the doubt about her manager’s certificate this could not be progressed. Accordingly there is a suggestion that there has been some form of sanction already.

[7] On the other hand it has always been our view that we should keep standards for managers as high as possible. After all the grant of a certificate is a privilege. The higher the standards, the greater the opportunity will be for achieving the Act’s objective, which is to contribute to the reduction of liquor abuse throughout the country. While some of the above incidents relate to liquor abuse, others do not. We believe that at this stage it is too soon to have the application granted. We believe that Miss Wishart needs to satisfy us that she has put the past behind her, and has the committed support of her employer who is willing to trust her to manage licensed premises on her own.

[8] We therefore propose to adjourn this application for 12 months rather than refusing it. Miss Wishart has 12 months to prove herself. We believe that in the last three months of the adjourned period she could be appointed as a temporary or acting manager if her employer wished to give her that responsibility, and assuming that the provisions of ss.128 or 129 have been complied with. If after 12 months there are no further concerns expressed by the Police or the District Licensing Agency Inspector, the application will be granted on the papers without any further hearing. On the other hand if other issues arise during that “probationary” period then a further public hearing may be necessary or the application will be refused.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 2nd day of April 2009

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Rachael Wishart.doc(jeh)