Norris v Shakespeare Liquor [2011] NZLLA 609 (29 June 2011)

Last Updated: 3 August 2011

[2011] NZLLA PH 609-610

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application pursuant to s.132 of the Act for suspension of off-licence number 016/OFF/02/06 issued to THY MERCHANTS LIMITED in respect of premises situated at 2/30 Raleigh Street, Cambridge known as “Shakespeare Liquor”

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application pursuant to s.135 of the Act for suspension of General Manager's Certificate number 016/GEN/0057/09 issued to GAGANDEEP SINGH

BETWEEN LINDSAY ANTHONY NORRIS

(Waipa District Licensing Agency Inspector)

Applicant

AND THY MERCHANTS LIMITED

First respondent

AND GAGANDEEP SINGH

Second respondent

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

HEARING at HAMILTON on 23 June 2011

APPEARANCES

Mr L A Norris – Waipa District Licensing Agency Inspector – applicant
Mr J Bajaj – on behalf of first respondent
Mr G Singh – second respondent
Sergeant C R Greenwood – NZ Police – to assist

DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] The two applications giving rise to this decision result from the same incident.

[2] Pursuant to s.132 of the Act the applicant has applied for the suspension of the on-licence issued to the licensee alleging, pursuant to s.132(3)(a) of the Act, that the licensed premises have been conducted in breach of s.155 of the Act (sale or supply of liquor to minors).

[3] An application has also been made for the suspension of the General Manager's Certificate issued to Mr Singh. Pursuant to s.135(3)(a) of the Act it is alleged that Mr Singh as duty manager failed to conduct the licensed premises in a proper manner.

[4] In each case the allegation (which was admitted) is that on Friday, 17 December 2010 at 7.25 pm, when Mr Singh was the duty manager of the off-licensed premises, liquor was sold to a person under the age of 18 years. No identification was sought from the underaged person.

[5] On 6 May 2009 the licensee failed a controlled purchase operation as a result of which its off-licence was suspended for 24 hours.

[6] Thus, this is the second time that the licensee has appeared before the Authority having breached a controlled purchase operation.

[7] Mr Singh has held his General Manager's Certificate for approximately 15 months. He has not appeared before the Authority previously.

[8] Mr Bajaj, the sole director of the licensee, told the Authority that as a result of the previous failed controlled purchase operation a system had been put in place to prevent a recurrence. That system involved one of the staff members checking identification of patrons as they enter the premises. On this occasion Mr Bajaj was meant to have checked the young person’s identification but he was engaged in picking up some stock and the young person was able to enter the premises without hindrance. Thereupon a Mr O’Shaunnessy sold the young person the liquor without checking as to identification or age. When the young person went to leave the premises, according to Mr Bajaj, Mr O’Shaunnessy told Mr Bajaj that he had checked the young person’s age and identification and as a result Mr Bajaj allowed the young person to leave the premises with the liquor. However, technically the sale was effected at the time the liquor was purchased from Mr O’Shaunnessey at the counter. Mr Singh, the duty manager, was engaged in bringing stock into the store from outside. He was not in the shop when the incident occurred.

[9] That the system failed indicates that it was not a good one. In any event, the system was unsatisfactory in that it allowed the duty manager to leave the premises in breach of s.115 of the Act. For the system to have been effective:

• [a] The duty manager should have insisted that he did not leave the premises so long as he was the duty manager; and
  
• [b] The licensee should have insisted that the duty manager was present on the premises so long as he was the duty manager and the premises were open for business.
  

[10] This is the second time that the licensee has failed a controlled purchase operation. Its excuse that it had put in place an appropriate system is unsatisfactory. As previously indicated, the system was inadequate.

[11] Mr Singh as duty manager has no excuse for failing in his duty.

[12] Accordingly the off-licence is suspended for 48 hours commencing Friday, 22 July 2011.

[13] Mr Singh’s General Manager's Certificate is suspended for 30 days commencing Monday, 18 July 2011.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 29TH day of June 2011

B M Holmes
Secretary

Shakespeare Liquor.doc(aw)