Gandhi [2010] NZLLA 451 (30 April 2010)

Last Updated: 7 May 2010

Decision No.PH 451/2010

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by HEMALKUMAR GANDHI and HEMALI GANDHI, trading in partnership, pursuant to s.31 of the Act for an off-licence in respect of premises situated at 157A Wainuiomata Road, Wainuiomata, known as “Wainuiomata Liquor Store”

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

Chairman: District Court Judge J D Hole
Member: Dr J Horn

HEARING at WELLINGTON on 27 April 2010

APPEARANCES

Mr H Gandhi - on behalf of applicant
Miss K Naylor - Lower Hutt District Licensing Agency Inspector - to assist
Acting Sergeant T van Ooyen - NZ Police - to assist
Mr J Carey - objector

ORAL DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] Neither the Police or the Inspector has opposed this application since the application was amended to reduce the proposed hours to 9.00 am to 10.00 pm daily. However, three objections were lodged to the application which is the reason that the matter came to the Authority for a hearing.

[2] An objection by Mr Taylor to the effect that the proposed hours were excessive seems to have been satisfied by the proposed new hours. Mr Taylor did not appear at the hearing

[3] An objection was lodged by Mr Carey who lives some distance from the proposed premises. Mr Carey was represented at the hearing by his son Jason Carey. Jason Carey was asked to advise the Authority how his father could claim to have a greater interest in the application than the public generally. He indicated that he knew of no reason that would give his father a greater interest in the application than the public generally. In those circumstances it seems that s.32(1) of the Act applies to this proposed objection. In short Mr Carey has no status to object.

[4] The final objection was raised by Super Liquor Holdings Limited. It was not represented at the hearing. Questions arise as to whether or not it has status to object in terms of s.32(1) of the Act. Even if it does it would seem clear that in the main its objection would come within the provisions of s.35(2) of the Act which requires that the Authority must not take into account any prejudicial effect that the grant of the licence may have on the business conducted pursuant to any other licence. The objection did contain opposition to the originally proposed hours but the variation to the application satisfies this.

[5] Effectively therefore there is no opposition or valid objection to the application. It appears to be in order. Accordingly the application for the off-licence is granted subject to the usual conditions. A copy of this decision will be delivered to the parties in due course.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 30TH day of April 2010

B M Holmes
Deputy Secretary

Wainuiomata Liquor Store.doc(aw)`