Calendar Girls [2012] NZLLA 723 (27 June 2012)

Last Updated: 19 July 2012

[2012] NZLLA 723

IN THE MATTER of the Sale of Liquor Act 1989

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application by CASINO BAR (No 3) LIMITED for an on-licence pursuant to s.9 of the Act in respect of premises situated at 13 Dixon Street, Wellington, known as "Calendar Girls"

BEFORE THE LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY

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

DECISION

This is an application by Casino Bar (No 3) Limited for an on-licence in respect of premises situated at 13 Dixon Street, Wellington, known as “Calendar Girls”.

The business will trade as an adult entertainment venue with hours sought for the sale of liquor between 7.00 am and 3.00 am daily. It is proposed that the premises will be designated restricted in their entirety. The District Licensing Agency Inspector and the Medical Officer of Health do not oppose the application.

Advertising attracted two letters of objection one of which was filed with the District Licensing Agency three weeks after the final date for lodgement prescribed by the Act. That objection does not address any of the criteria specified in s.13(1) of the Act.

The other objection, filed on behalf of the licensee of “Mermaid” bar in Courtenay Place relates to a similar type of business and it is acknowledged through counsel that “The objector...........will be in competition with the applicant.” It is accepted that this may be deemed by the Agency to be a trade objection in terms of s.13(2) of the Act which precludes taking into account the prejudicial effect that the grant of a licence may have on any business conducted under any other licence. Both objections are, therefore, inadmissible.

A memorandum to the applicant’s consultant from Martin Ferguson (Christchurch District Licensing Agency Senior Inspector) states that a similar business has been operated by the applicant in Christchurch without problems since 2010.

Auckland District Licensing Agency issued an on-licence for “Calendar Girls” in Karangahape Road on 9 January 2012. The licensee for that business comprises an identical corporate structure to this applicant. The Auckland Police initially had misgivings as to the applicant’s suitability because the proposed licensee’s husband, James Alan Samson, might be involved in the business. He has extensive criminal convictions. Their misgivings were satisfied by an undertaking limiting Mr Samson’s involvement in the business.

The Police opposed this application contending that Mr Samson, the husband of Jacqui Patricia Le Prou (director of the applicant) has been and will be involved in the operation of the business. It is contended that his unsuitability makes the applicant unsuitable.

An analysis of the Police letter in opposition dated 23 May 1012 to our Secretary indicates that Mr Samson has been involved in setting up of all the businesses and their marketing. On that basis the Police contend that the applicant is unsuitable. Further, if correct, this might be contrary to the undertakings given in respect of the Auckland and Christchurch operations. Significantly no Police applications pursuant to s.132 of the Act have been filed in relation to either of the businesses in Auckland or Christchurch.

When determining the applicant’s suitability, the principal issue is if the applicant is suitable given the statutory object of reducing liquor abuse. The setting up of the businesses and their marketing would seem to have little to do with this object. Rather, it is how the licensee operates or will operate the business once the premises are open for the sale and supply of liquor that is the issue.

In respect of this application the applicant has provided an undertaking through her solicitor that her husband (Mr Samson) will not play any role in the business when it is open for the sale or supply of liquor, and will not enter the premises when they are open for the sale and supply of liquor.

Whilst the Police have stated that they will not accept any undertaking in this regard, the Authority considers that, if it is complied with, the Police concerns become unmeritorious. If the undertaking is not complied with, the Authority expects the Police to immediately bring an application pursuant to s.132 of the Act for the cancellation of the licence. The Authority regards even a minor breach of an undertaking very seriously.

The Police report in opposition to this application filed pursuant to s.11 of the Act does not have the status of a public objection lodged in terms of s.10 of the Act. Consequently, it is not necessarily incumbent upon the Authority to convene a hearing to determine the matter. Accordingly we will deal with the application on the papers.

Given the explicit undertaking by the applicant we are satisfied as to the matters to which we must have regard as set out in s.13 of the Act, and we grant the applicant an on-licence. A copy of the licence setting out the conditions to which it is subject is attached to this decision.

The licence may issue immediately.

The applicant's attention is drawn to ss.25 and 115(3) of the Act obliging the holder of an on-licence to display:-

1. A sign attached to the exterior of the premises, so as to be easily read by persons outside each principal entrance, stating the ordinary hours of business during which the premises will be open for the sale of liquor; and
   
2. A copy of the licence, and of the conditions of the licence, attached to the interior of the premises so as to be easily read by persons entering through each principal entrance; and
   
3. A sign prominently displayed inside the premises, which identifies by name the manager for the time being on duty.
   

DATED at WELLINGTON this 27th day of June 2012

B M Holmes
Secretary

Calendar Girls.doc(ab)