Young v Trevenos [2011] NZLLA 755 (28 July 2011)

Last Updated: 29 August 2011

[2011] NZLLA PH 755

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 on-licence number 060/ON/3/2005 issued to PREMIER HOSPITALITY LIMITED in respect of premises situated at 22 Riccarton Road, Christchurch known as “Trevenos Bar and Restaurant”

BETWEEN THOMAS ADRIAN YOUNG

(Police Officer of Christchurch)

Applicant

AND PREMIER HOSPITALITY LIMITED

Respondent

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

HEARING at CHRISTCHURCH on 20 July 2011

APPEARANCES

Sergeant A J Lawn – NZ Police - applicant
Mr A J Higgins – on behalf of respondent
Mr M Ferguson – Christchurch District Licensing Agency Inspector – to assist

DECISION OF THE AUTHORITY

[1] This decision relates to an application for the suspension of the on-licence issued to Premier Hospitality Limited in respect of “Trevenos Bar and Restaurant”. The premises operate as a motel, tavern and restaurant. The on-licence covers all aspects of the premises except the motels.

[2] The agreed summary of facts indicates that in terms of s.132(3) of the Act there are grounds supporting the application. According to the agreed summary of facts, at about 3.50 pm on Thursday 15 July 2010 the premises were the subject of a controlled purchase operation. Two minors (a male and a female) aged 15 and 16 years of age respectively entered the premises and purchased tap beer. They sat down at a table. Immediately after the sale the duty manager approached the table. He told the purchasers that he had not sighted evidence of age and that he needed to see their identification. He told them that he would have to take the beer back and refund its cost if identification could not be provided.

[3] As a result of the incident the duty manager was dismissed. There is no indication that any other steps were taken by the respondent as a result of the incident.

[4] In terms of the decision of the Authority in Winter Palace Limited PH 156-157/2010 the starting point in terms of penalty is three days suspension.

[5] Aggravating features are that the sale to two minors took place without identification being requested. In addition, no systemic measures seem to have been investigated to ascertain if the respondent’s procedures could be improved.

[6] Mitigating circumstances are the fact that the duty manager, upon appreciating his error, took immediate steps to rectify the position and prevent the young persons consuming the liquor. Further, the respondent dismissed the duty manager which is indicative of the fact that the respondent took the incident very seriously.

[7] Whilst the licensed premises have sustained significant damage as a result of the Christchurch earthquake, given the nature of the respondent’s transgression little significance can be placed on this fact. Sales to minors are regarded by the Authority as amongst the worst evidence of liquor abuse.

[8] In terms of s.132(6) of the Act the Authority considers that it is desirable that an order be made.

[9] In all the circumstances of the case the on-licence issued to Premier Hospitality Limited is suspended for two days commencing 9.00 am on Thursday 25 August 2011.

DATED at WELLINGTON this 28TH day of July 2011

M Langworthy
Deputy Secretary

Trevenos Bar.doc(aw)