Strait Shipping [2010] NZLLA 333 (14 April 2010)

Last Updated: 16 April 2010

Decision No.333/2010-337/2010

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of applications for renewal of on-licences pursuant to s.18 of the Act made by STRAIT SHIPPING LIMITED in respect of the vessel based at Glasgow Wharf, Wellington, known as "MV Bluebridge"; and TRUST HOUSE LIMITED in respect of premises situated at 134 The Parade, Island Bay, Wellington, known as “Island Bay Bar”; and Q C WANG LIMITED in respect of premises situated at 328 Tinakori Road, Thorndon, Wellington, known as "Tinakori Bistro"

AND

IN THE MATTER of applications pursuant to s.41 of the Act by TRUST HOUSE LIMITED for renewal of an off-licence in respect of premises situated at 134-136 The Parade, Island Bay, Wellington, known as “Liquorland Island Bay”; and G H & A T RUSSELL LIMITED in respect of premises situated at 26 Ganges Road, Khandallah, Wellington, known as “Khandallah New World”

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

Chairman: District Court Judge J D Hole
Member: Mr P M McHaffie

DECISION

These applications, filed with the Wellington District Licensing Agency, all seek renewal of the respective licences with no changes to the existing terms and conditions. The Police, Medical Officer of Health and the Agency Inspector do not oppose renewal.

Public notification of the applications attracted notices of objection from Mr Bernard O’Shaughnessy, a resident of Newtown. His concerns hinge upon what he sees as an unacceptable and unhealthy attitude to the sale and consumption of liquor generally. Mr O’Shaughnessy contends that the applicants are unsuitable, but apart from this assertion the matters of concern he raises do not address any of the criteria specified in ss.22 or 45 of the Act.
The objector expresses the view that the licensing regime in Wellington is unsatisfactorily administered to the extent that compliance with the provisions and constraints of the Sale of Liquor Act is not being achieved or enforced.

The tenor of the objections leads us to the view that Mr O’Shaughnessy’s interest in the applications is no greater than that of any other member of the public generally. Accordingly, we conclude he has no status in terms of ss.19 and 42 of the Act and his objections cannot be considered.

The reports from the District Licensing Agency Inspector indicate that the businesses have all been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the conditions of the licences. In those circumstances, in the absence of any matters raised in opposition by reporting authorities we are unable to accept that any of the applicants are not suitable to continue to hold the licences.

Accordingly we propose to deal with the applications on the papers.

We are satisfied as to the matters to which we must have regard as set out in ss.22 and 45 the Act and we renew each of the licences on the existing terms and conditions for a period of three years. We authorise the issue of notices of renewal.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 14TH day of April 2010

_____________________
B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Wellington Omnibus2.doc(ab)