Wright v Quedec [2010] NZLLA 375 (20 April 2010)

Last Updated: 23 April 2010

Decision No. PH 375/2010

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application pursuant to s.135 of the Act for suspension or cancellation of General Manager's Certificate number DLA/01/GM/132/2007 issued to DELIAH ROSE QUEDEC

BETWEEN GRAEME LESLIE WRIGHT

(Police Officer of Kerikeri)

Applicant

AND DELIAH ROSE QUEDEC

Respondent

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

HEARING at PAIHIA on 23 March 2010

APPEARANCES

Senior Constable G L Wright - NZ Police - applicant
Ms D R Quedec - respondent
Mr J A Thorne - Far North District Licensing Agency Inspector - to assist

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This decision relates to an application brought pursuant to s.135 of the Act for the suspension or cancellation of a General Manager's Certificate issued to Deliah Rose Quedec. Initially the application was for the cancellation of the General Manager's Certificate however an application was made to amend the application at the hearing so that the Authority would be given the option of either suspending or cancelling the certificate. That application was granted.

[2] The grounds for the application are those set out in s.135(3)(b) of the Act to the effect that the conduct of Ms Quedec was such as to show that she is not a suitable person to hold a General Manager's Certificate.

[3] In the application the allegations indicate that on 23 November 2007 in Russell Ms Quedec assaulted another person whilst Ms Quedec was intoxicated. It alleges that on 18 May 2009, at Kaikohe District Court she entered a plea of guilty to the charge of assault and was given diversion.

[4] The allegations also indicate that Ms Quedec has a history of alcohol abuse. She has a drink driving conviction on 11 January 2003 and a further drink driving conviction on 16 July 2005. There is also the suggestion of another incident in which Ms Quedec was involved where it is claimed that she was affected by alcohol. The Authority heard no evidence about that particular incident.

[5] Referring to the incident of 23 November 2007 the Authority learned from Ms Quedec that it was her intention to defend the charge of assault. Having waited on two occasions for her case to be called in the District Court she finally became frustrated and agreed to enter a plea of guilty on the basis that she would be given diversion.

[6] Regrettably the actions which Ms Quedec has described and as to how she obtained diversion are common place. The Authority is well aware that people who consider that they have a defence to certain charges will often enter pleas of guilty and be given diversion simply because they become frustrated with the delays inherent in the Court system.

[7] For that reason the Authority questioned Ms Quedec about the incident. It recognises that it has only heard her side of the story and did not hear the complaint. Ms Quedec indicated that she probably had a defence available to a charge of assault. That defence was probably self defence. However, had she been charged with disorderly behaviour or fighting it is unlikely she would have had a defence to either of those charges. Significantly from the Authority’s point of view the incident was fuelled by alcohol abuse.

[8] The real concern of the Authority is that Ms Quedec does have a history of alcohol abuse. There are the two drink driving convictions and the incident of 23 November 2007. In terms of G L Osborne NZLLA 2388/95 the Authority has no doubt that the overall conduct of Ms Quedec indicates that she is a person whose conduct has been such as to show that she is not a suitable person to hold a General Manager's Certificate. Accordingly the grounds for the application have been made out.

[9] Two further matters arise. The first is that at present Ms Quedec is not employed as a general manager. She has occasionally used her General Manager's Certificate for individual functions. However, she has plans to become involved in a business. If these plans come to fruition she will need her General Manager's Certificate early next year.

[10] The second matter of concern to the Authority is the delay in bringing this application for suspension. The incident occurred on 23 November 2007. According to Ms Quedec’s evidence the Constable who was involved in investigating the incident was aware that she held a General Manager's Certificate.

[11] In these circumstances the Authority considers that this application should have been brought much earlier, indeed at the outside it should have been brought about two months after the incident. The maxim “justice delayed is justice denied” applies to this situation. It is unfair to hold punitive measures of this sort over a person for as long as two years. In this case it was more than that.

[12] The issue for the Authority now is whether it is desirable for the General Manager's Certificate to be cancelled or suspended. This is not a case for cancellation. Indeed that was inherent in the application brought by the Police to amend the application in the first place.

[13] The Authority considers it is a case for suspension. Normally the grounds which have been established would occasion a suspension of one month or possibly slightly longer. However, taking into account the delay factor the Authority considers that it is appropriate that the General Manager's Certificate be suspended for a period of 14 days commencing today. That is to say Tuesday 23 March 2010.

[14] The fact that Ms Quedec is not presently employed as a general manager is a factor the Authority has decided should not be taken into account in this application for suspension of her certificate. It would have been a factor of course had this been an application for renewal of the General Manager's Certificate.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 20TH day of April 2010

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Deliah Quedec.doc(aw)