Recent LLA Decisions Reflect the Changing State of Play

There have been a few recent decisions of the Liquor Licensing Authority (LLALiquor Licensing Authority) that are changing the face of liquor enforcement and liquor licensing issues across New Zealand. ALAC congratulates the LLA, for what seems to be a changing attitude towards the issuing of licences and dealing with enforcement applications, in light of the heightened public conversation regarding alcohol related harm and liquor abuse issues across New Zealand.One such decision to receive praise from public health and enforcement agencies was the refusal to grant a full off-licence to The Warehouse in Albany. Dr Andrew Hearn from ALAC provided a submission to the LLA and contended that, “opening the market for spirits and RTDs to large retail chains would result in further discounting and increased harm to young people.” 

In its decision, the Authority recognised that two department stores with complementary style off-licences may not technically qualify for the licences, and may need to have those licences reviewed. The Authority also heard from the Police, the Hospitality Association, the District Licensing Agency and the Medical Officer of Health.  All opposed the issuing of the licence.

Another decision to make headlines was the Creek Liquor Store, in Cannons Creek, Porirua East. This application raised a high level of discontent among a range of social service agencies and community members, regarding the lack of community say in licensing decisions. This community mobilised, opposing the liquor licence, and gathering much public support along the way. In the hearing, the Authority heard from the Medical Officer of Health for the region who sought to establish that such a community, with a poor level of health, would be adversely affected by the increased availability of alcohol. 

This, coupled with a number of other objectors, representing the Porirua Alcohol and Drug Cluster, health workers, church leaders and schools (to name a few) provided added weight to the Authorities decision. In his decision, Judge Unwin stated, “the evidence given by Dr Palmer and the objectors was excellently presented and quite overwhelming. Its combined force persuaded us that if this particular application were to be granted, an increase in liquor abuse and alcohol related harm in this community would be likely.”  The application was refused by the Authority.  

Over 100 community members march to the Porirua District Court to hear the “Creek Liquor Store” application, chanting “No  more liquor stores”. Henry’s Beer, Wine and Spirits Hallswell (PH 1789/2008) also found the public objecting to their application for an off-licence in Christchurch. Two residents appeared in support of their objections to the issue of the licence, and provided a petition with over 800 signatures along with their submissions. 

The Authority granted the licence with less trading hours than originally sought, but made the following comments in its decision. “We believe that the retail initiative known as loss leading needs to be looked at more seriously by licensees. If a licensee uses liquor to loss lead, then he or she is stimulating, and not meeting demand. Where liquor is involved, it is not good enough for a licensee to say that they have to continue with this business practice because of competition. Most licensees understand that they are dealing with a drug, and that they have a duty under the [Sale of Liquor] Act to help them promote the reduction of liquor abuse. In our experience loss leading helps to promote the abuse of liquor.”  The Authority goes on to say, “in future, examples of loss leading by an off-licensee will be treated as an indication of lack of suitability.”

Other notable LLA Decisions, include the introduction of new minimum food standards (Empire Hotel decision, PH 1652/2008). The proposed guidelines are to apply to all premises, apart from restaurants and off-licences, from mid-2009. They state:

• The range of food must be readily available at all times that the premises are open

• Menus must be highly visible and food should be actively promoted using a variety of mediums, e.g menus on the tables, a board, or food on display

• Food should also be advertised in any outdoor areas

• Bar staff are expected to actively promote the range of food options

• A minimum of three types of food should be available. e.g paninis, pizzas, lasagne, pies, toasted or fresh sandwiches, wedges, filled rolls, and/or salads.  (This does not mean three types of pie.)

• It is acceptable to have a menu from neighbouring premises to provide for one or two of these options. However, there must be a back up option that could be produced on site.

• A minimum standard to be accepted on site would be a microwave or fryer and utensils, and a supply of a variety of ‘long life’ meals that do not require temperature control, or tins of soup and rolls.  There should be an area for preparation of food and utensils for service of the food.

An interesting case in Auckland City (PH 130-133/2009) helped confirm that the Act prohibits selling full bottles of spirits for consumption on licensed premises (s154(a) of the Act), and s.169(1) prohibits the sale of spirits in otherwise than a vessel of less than 500ml. In this case, the karaoke bar concerned was found to be selling one-litre jugs that contained tea with 200ml of whisky. It was also observed by the officers that there were “vomit basins” available for customers within the premises.  One in the hall, and one in the ladies toilet. The licensee argued that such “vomit basins” were decorative and they were needed, to retain the company’s status as a five-star karaoke business.

Finally, the Authority has cancelled the licence for Te Awamutu Wines and Spirits, making the following comments.  “In our view, the four sales to minors in the past two years call for severe consequences.  Accordingly, we intend to cancel the licence.”