Liquor & Gaming Specialists

  • Home
  • News
  • Liquor Licensing
    • Minors on Licensed Premises in Queensland
    • Extended Trading Hours for Licensed Premises
    • Risk Assessed Management Plan
    • FAQ
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Links
  • Call us on 07 3252 4066

8 May 2015 by Matthew Jones

Drink Pre-Loading – Survey Results

I recently attended a very informative presentation by A/Inspector Corey Allen (Queensland Police Service) A/Prof Grant Devilly (Griffith University) on the results of a study of the effects of drink pre-loading in Fortitude Valley, the Gold Coast and Mackay. The survey of 3,201 people revealed a number of interesting facts and attitudes towards drink pre-loading, including the reason people do it and the effect it has on their levels of intoxication.

We’ve been provided with a PDF version of the slideshow from the presentation. You’ll find it makes interesting reading and if you have any questions, the contact details for both presenters are included.

SmartStart Preloading & A Safe Night Out

Filed Under: News Tagged With: advertising, DSP, Extended Hours, Liquor Accord, safe night out, taxis

1 May 2015 by Diarmuid Deans

New Laws to Impact Restaurants

Licensed restaurants have been the target of a number of OLGR initiatives over the years, and the most recent change, effective from 1 July 2015, will see the introduction of some of the toughest rules yet. Aimed at any restaurant trading as a bar, licensees will be required to comply with principal activity requirements for each trading day.

What does this mean for restaurant licensees?

Up until the mid-1990s a restaurant, or on premises meals, liquor licence restricted the supply of liquor to in association with a meal and some operators may remember ensuring patrons were intending to dine before serving a drink. However, since then the principal activity, or what used to be the primary purpose, provision of meals prepared, and served to be eaten, on the licensed premises has been used as an assessment of compliance. In effect, if a restaurant could demonstrate it was generally maintaining its principal activity, there was no limit on the amount of liquor that could be sold not in association with a meal.

The upcoming changes, part of the Safe Night Out Legislation Amendment Bill 2014, will tighten things up by requiring restaurant licensees to comply with principal activity requirements on the basis of each trading day. In other words, if a number of patrons attend for a drink and not a meal, there must have been enough dining patrons throughout that one day to ensure that most patrons consumed a meal on premises.

The concerns about these changes are obvious according to Liquor & Gaming Specialists Director Matthew Jones. Licensees will be expected to monitor the number of patrons consuming meals and the number not doing so. How will a busy restaurant owner, who sells numerous coffees and other beverages, ensure that these patrons do not outnumber, or even equate to, the number of patrons consuming meals?

Other changes, which will perhaps affect fewer restaurants, include the winding back of extended trading hours. From July 1, all existing and new restaurants will be limited to 1 am trading, regardless of any current approval. There are whispers that this reduction in available hours will include a reduction in the annual licence fee uplift, but this is yet to be confirmed.

For the more seriously impacted licensees, strategies to mitigate the effects include changing licence types: bar, caf and commercial hotel licences are the likely alternatives. For the rest, it looks like yet another compliance headache.

Filed Under: News Tagged With: amendments, compliance, principal activity, restaurant

4 July 2014 by Matthew Jones

Safe Night Out Amendments

The Queensland Parliament has now passed the Safe Night Out amendments, we have summarised the points of the bill below.

Amendments to the Criminal Code

  1. The introduction of the ‘coward punch’ offence.

The offence of ‘unlawful striking causing death’ is introduced by the Bill, carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and defined as a death caused by the striking to a person on their head or neck. The distinction between this new offence and the other homicide offences is that it expressly precludes the element of intention from its definition; meaning that defences such as provocation are unavailable. Further, the offence disenables the offender from relying on other commonly available defences such as the defence of accident or that of the prevention of recurrent insult.

  1. Introducing stricter penalties for various offences

The ‘unlawful striking causing death’ offence also obliges the Court to order that an offender is sentenced to serve the lesser of 80% of their prison sentence or 15 years imprisonment before being permitted for apply for parole.

The offence relating to the serious assault against public officers is proposed, under the Bill, to mirror that of the assault against police officers. This means that where certain behaviours are exhibited in the process of the assault, such as biting or spitting at the officer, the offender is liable to a maximum prison sentence of 14 years rather than the previous 7 years.

  1. Aggravation

The Bill introduces a new Chapter 35A to address the circumstances of aggravation in relation to particular offences. This amendment changes the way in which offender’s are able to claim the defence of mistake of fact in relation to intoxication, and introduces presumptive factors in relation to adverse affectation from intoxicating substances.

In addition to these changes to the Criminal Code, the Bill also alters the sentencing process for liquor-associated offences under the Penalties and Sentences Act. The major change is that the voluntary intoxication of an offender is proposed to be removed from the court’s consideration of mitigating factors in determining sentences. The Court is also required to order offenders to complete community service orders when convicted of certain offences committed when intoxicated and in a public place.

Amendments to the Liquor Act

  1. A new definition of “unduly intoxicated”.

The contextual nature of the previous definition has gone, however it may be arguable that the behaviour is the result of the context in which it occurs. Importantly, the objective assessment (the ordinary person reference) has been removed. What we now have is a new concept – “noticeably affected”. Does this mean that if you can tell someone has been drinking (or has taken drugs) from their speech, balance, coordination or behaviour that they are UNDULY intoxicated?  This would seem to be correct, which implies a worryingly low standard; the definition looks more like one for “intoxicated” rather than “unduly intoxicated”.

  1. Introduction of “irresponsible” consumption of liquor.

The previous idea of “rapid or excessive” consumption of liquor will be replaced with the “irresponsible” consumption of liquor. This change applies to those parts of the legislation that regulate promotional practices.

  1. Changes to RAMPs

New sections will allow the commissioner to require a licensee to amend its RAMP and provide the amended plan for approval. The commissioner can do this for single licences, classes of licences, or for all licensees within a safe night precinct or restricted area. The Bill also expands the guideline-making power to expressly refer to stipulating how a licensee should comply with their responsibilities under the Act; an example given being a guideline for how licensees should determining whether a person is unduly intoxicated.

  1. Changes to restaurants

The changes relating to restaurant licences are quite ground-breaking; seeking to control these premises more closely in relation to compliance with their principal activity of serving meals. This is achieved by a combination of requirements applicable “throughout each trading day”. These include that most of the patrons for the business for that day must consume a meal; most of the licensed area of the premise is set up for dining; the kitchen must be open and ‘being used…for meal preparation’ for at least up to one hour before the end of the trading period; and that there are sufficient staff engaged in the preparation and service of meals.

Some of these matters are presently enforced through licence conditions (the second and third points). The others are new. It’s hard to know how effective the requirements will be in terms of the concern which has been expressed about restaurants operating as bars. “Trading day” and “trading period” are defined without reference to licensed trading hours, so a restaurant which opens for breakfast could take advantage of this patronage to satisfy the requirement that most of the patrons on a trading day consume a meal.

For some time it has been unclear whether the assessment of compliance with principal activity requirements should refer to the totality of trading or to a shorter period. For example, if a restaurant operated as a bar on a Friday afternoon for several hours, but on an overall assessment was primarily a meals business, it was arguably compliant. The new requirements will clarify that compliance is now assessed on daily basis; thus ending the speculation.

Interestingly, the present standard conditions on meals licences about the majority of the premises being set up for dining, and meals being available until 1 hour before close are stated not to apply during a function. This appears to have been omitted.

Last but by no means least is the limitation on access to extended trading hours for restaurants. The new provisions will only allow extended hours through until 1am. Restaurants with later trading will retain these through until 1 July 2015, after which they will revert to 1am.

We assume this provision will also apply to premises in the prepared food category.

  1. Introduction of “Nightclub” licences

Although at present a nightclub business can be established under more than one licence category, the amendments will remove the “entertainment” principal activity category from the commercial other subsidiary on premises licence set, and place it into a category of its own – simply called a nightclub licence. The curious requirement in the present Act that the licence only authorises the sale of liquor to a person who is being entertained has been removed, and replaced with the same general requirement which applies to the other on-premises categories, that the licence only authorises liquor sales if the business complies with its principal activity, which presumably means that if entertainment is provided most of the time the licensee will be compliant.

A further requirement is that toilets must now be provided within the licensed premises; and these licences cannot be obtained for a vehicle.

Nightclub licensees will still be able to operate without entertainment prior to 5pm, but will be required to comply during that period with the new restaurant rules.

  1. Adult Entertainment Permits

An application will require the consent of the local council, although the council may abstain. There is no stated recourse in the Bill if the Council rejects the proposal, meaning that it is likely that merits of judicial review of the Council’s decision is the relevant remedial option for unsuccessful applicants.

  1. Extended Trading Hours

The moratorium will end as promised on 31 August. After that it appears that applications will be considered according to the same procedure and considerations as have applied in the past. One change is that if an approval is given despite an objection from Police, the Commissioner is obliged to publish reasons for the decision on the OLGR web site for a period of 3 months.

  1. Public Safety and Amenity

There are a series of new provisions in a new Division 1A in Part 5 under the heading “Public Safety and Amenity”. They articulate a range of matters which the Commissioner must consider when deciding applications, and also clarify the ability to impose wide-ranging conditions on licences and other approvals such as when liquor can be sold, the type or quantity of liquor, responsible practices about service, supply and promotion of liquor, noise abatement measures, conditions about the structure of the premises and security arrangements.

  1. Responsible Service, Supply and Promotion and Preservation of Amenity

A new Division (Division 1AA) is to be inserted in Part 6. It seems to merely collect and expand upon a number of elements of the existing legislation rather than creating new obligations. For example, a licensee is presently under an obligation to maintain a safe environment in and around the licensed premises, as stated in Section 148A(4). Under the amendments the obligation will be stated in a Section 142ZZB and will be expanded to include a requirement that the licensee “take all reasonable steps to ensure the use of the premises does not adversely affect the amenity of the area”.

The new Division also includes expanded provisions about unacceptable practices and promotions, and the restrictions on advertising. It includes provisions allowing the Commissioner to issue “compliance notices” to licensees directing that, for example, a particular advertising practice cease. There are offence provisions for failing to comply with the notice.

  1. Mandatory ID Scanning

As expected, there are detailed provisions setting up the mandatory ID scanning system. All premises that trade after midnight in a safe night out precinct will be subject to the requirements. Other licences can be conditioned to require scanning, and would be thereafter subject to these provisions.

The requirement will be that a person must not be admitted to the premises unless their ID is scanned during the “regulated hours”, which are either the hours specified on a licence, or otherwise from 8pm through till close.

The scanning system, software, and database management system used by the licensee are all subject to detailed approval and licensing requirements, and there are extensive privacy provisions.

Banning notice information must be included in the database, and the scanning will detect a banned person, who must not be allowed entry to the premises.

The new provisions contemplate a licensee banning a person from their premises, and then sharing the ID information about the banned person with licensees linked by an ID scanning system.

  1. Safe Night Precincts

Safe Night Precincts replace the trialled Drink Safe Precincts, and will be expanded to numerous precincts around the State. Each precinct may be overseen by an incorporated association referred to as a “local board”. Licensees within the relevant precinct must become members of the local board.

The new provisions will also allow for the creation of a public safety consultative committee to advise the local board. The Commissioner will appoint the members of the consultative committee, which can include Police, Local Government, Department, Transport and Community group representatives, very much along the lines of the existing DSP committees.

The local board will have the power to terminate the membership of a particular licensee, and the provisions create a procedure for this to occur. It’s unclear what the effect of the membership being terminated is on the licensee moving forward.

Filed Under: News Tagged With: CCTV, DSP, Extended Hours, ID scanners, lockout, restaurant, RSA, safe night out, undue intoxication

3 June 2014 by Diarmuid Deans

Why Lockouts Don’t Work

The lockout laws introduced in Kings Cross in late February this year have been heralded as a success, with numbers of violent assaults dropping by half since the introduction of the laws. The changes in crime rates after adopting similar lockout laws for Newcastle, over a substantially longer period of 5 years, averaged at a 30% reduction in crime. While both of these areas seem to reflect positive changes in behaviour caused, or at least influenced, by restrictions on late-night trading of bars and hotels, the statistics lose much of their effect when viewed alongside the crime rates of other areas in New South Wales. In the same period in the similar-sized cities of Penrith, Wollongong, Sutherland Shire and Gosford, similar or greater reductions in crime rates were recorded, despite the absence of any similar lockout provisions for liquor establishments; suggesting lockouts don’t work as the provisions in Newcastle had little effect in bringing down the rates of violent crimes.

With little demonstrable direct impact on the rates of violent behaviour, the negative effects of the lockout laws may outweigh the supposed benefits that they bring. The economic impact of reduced trading hours is a cause of concern for many business owners and the reduced activity of Sydney’s iconic nightlife precincts threatens the city’s tourism sector.

Further issues with the lockout provisions could be that rather than promoting responsible drinking habits, the restrictions encourage patrons to drink more in a shorter time period, or simply travel to locations unaffected by the legislation. NSW Assistant Commissioner Mark Murdoch admitted to the ABC that the new rules could “just move the crowds and violence elsewhere” . Peter Miller, Principal Research Fellow at Deakin University, also acknowledged the potential for the implementation of restrictions in some areas to simply move problems to other areas, which may not be as well-equipped to deal with them.

Patrons have regularly been shown to travel across the Queensland border for the increased trading hours offered by northern NSW venues, and Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate has already vocalised his ambition to capitalise on NSW’s restrictions, hoping to tempt NSW patrons across the border and turn the Gold Coast into “Australia’s Las Vegas”. Thus while it may appear that crime rates decrease in areas affected by the lockout provisions, it may simply be that the violence has been relocated to another area. Logically, this increased congregation of patrons in an area may lead to increased levels of alcohol-fuelled violence, with crowding at licensed venues identified as a leading propagator of violent activity.

Conversely, decreases in the level of patronage of a given precinct will logically reduce the number of incidents in that area. Statistics on the reduction in patron numbers since the introduction of the lockout in Sydney don’t appear to receive the same attention in the media as those relating to decreases in violent behaviour. The reality appears to be that since the O’Farrell crackdown, crowds have deserted the Cross by up to 30%, with other anecdotal reports depicting the desertion of previously renowned nightlife spots.

Identified instigators and catalysts of alcohol-related violence include diverse factors such as personal biology, type of liquor consumed, characteristic of the licensed premises and surrounds and the culture of the community1. With the lockout provisions focusing on just one of the multitude of factors shown to increase the chances of violent activity, it can only be said that the provisions are a poor attempt to remedy a much larger social problem. A number of owners and managers of licensed venues throughout NSW attribute the general decrease in violent behaviour they have witnessed to their habit of self-policing; adopting strategies ranging from providing free water and food for patrons and limiting the types of drinks they sell after a certain time .

What is needed is not a wide-reaching ban on the sale of liquor, but more targeted attempts to change the behaviour of both managers of licensed venues and “high-risk” patrons. This could be achieved with a mix of increased education and awareness of alcohol-related violence, and incentives for operators of licensed venues to self-regulate and adopt responsible behaviour, with punishment reserved for offenders and for those who do not or cannot sufficiently manage patron violence.

1. Pernanen, K. (1998). Prevention of alcohol-related violence. Contemporary Drug Problems, 25(3), 477–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/009145099802500305^

Filed Under: News Tagged With: compliance, DSP, Extended Hours, lockout, safe night out

21 April 2014 by Diarmuid Deans

Minors On Licensed Premises – Compliance Issues

Section 155 of the Liquor Act has been around in its current form for ages.  It creates the offence of allowing an underage person on licensed premises, which carries significant maximum penalties – 100 penalty units ($130.55 per unit = $13,055 for individuals, multiplied by 5 for companies).  It is also one of the offences which attracts on-the-spot fines.  We had a client cop one of these recently when a couple of minors managed to sneak into his detached bottleshop while staff were distracted – $1100 (2014 penalty).

The way the section works is that it first states the offence, then creates a series of exemptions to it.  Most people are aware, for example, that if a minor is accompanied by a responsible adult, then that’s OK. Well, mostly OK, the exemption isn’t available after 5pm in a nightclub. Other exemptions cover minors working at the premises or doing work experience, minors residing on the premises and minors eating a meal. The whole section is extracted below this article.

So what’s changed?  Over the last couple of weeks we have have received a number of calls from clients who have been visited by OLGR compliance officers who have been ‘reminding’ them that if a minor comes into the premises to purchase takeaway food, or to have a coffee or milkshake, then that’s a breach of section 155 unless the licensee has made application for and received a specific approval from OLGR. In recent years we have all seen the emergence and growth of our cafe culture, and young people enjoying a skinny cap or triple shot soy latte etc. However, more and more of these venues have become licensed and when the year 11 or 12 student pops in for their morning fix before school the licensee, inadvertently, has a problem.

The other common scenario is take away food.  Many licensees don’t realise that if Mum sends her 15 year old in to pick up the food, the licensee commits an offence by allowing the minor on the premises.

Fortunately, there’s a solution.  The list of exemptions in section 155 includes paragraph (e) which is in the following terms:

the minor is on the premises for a purpose, and in circumstances, approved by the commissioner or stated in a condition of the licence or permit;

Although for some time now OLGR officers have not been focussing on this area, that’s clearly changed, and we are presently arranging this exemption for a number of clients.  The cost is minimal, so if your customers include young people and you neither wish to exclude them nor risk a fine you should call us for assistance.


Relevant section from the Liquor Act 1992

155 Minors on premises

(1) This section applies to all minors other than an exempt minor.

(2) A licensee, permittee or person in control of the premises to which the licence or permit relates must ensure that a minor is not on the premises.

(3) Also, an employee or agent of the licensee or permittee must not allow a minor to enter the premises to which the licence or permit relates.

(3A) If a minor is on the premises, each of the following persons commits an offence—

(a) the licensee or permittee;

(b) if another person is in control of the premises—the other person;

(c) if an employee or agent of the licensee or permittee allowed the minor to enter the premises—the employee or agent.

Maximum penalty—100 penalty units.

(4) In this section—

exempt minor means a minor on premises to which a licence or permit relates if—

(a) the minor is a resident on the premises; or

(b) the minor is on the premises to—

(i) perform duties as an employee of the owner, or occupier, of the premises or a part of the premises; or

(ii) perform duties in the conduct of a lawful business; or

(iii) perform duties while receiving training for employment or work experience; or

(c) the minor is attending a function being held on the premises; or

(d) the premises are premises to which a community club licence, community other licence, craft beer producer permit or restricted liquor permit relates and the minor’s presence does not contravene the club’s rules or a condition of the licence or permit; or

(e) the minor is on the premises for a purpose, and in circumstances, approved by the commissioner or stated in a condition of the licence or permit; or

(f) the minor—

(i) is eating a meal on the premises; or

(ii) is accompanied by a responsible adult who is responsibly supervising the minor.

(5) However, a minor is not an exempt minor merely because the minor is eating a meal on the premises or accompanied by a responsible adult if—

(a) the minor is on premises after 5p.m.; and

(b) the licence for the premises is a nightclub licence.

This article was updated on 8 November 2018 to reflect the current value of the penalty unit and a change to the rules regarding nightclub licences.

Filed Under: News Tagged With: compliance, minors, restaurant

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • …
  • 18
  • Next Page »

Search

Recent Posts

  • Christmas & New Year Trading Hours 2024
  • Easter and ANZAC Day Trading Hours 2024
  • OLGR’s Liquor Compliance Strategy

Connect With LGS

Liquor & Gaming Specialists
Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on LinkedInFollow Us on YouTube

Contact Us

Liquor & Gaming Specialists
30 Prospect Street
Fortitude Valley QLD 4006 AU
T: 07 3252 4066
F: 07 3252 1466

Send a Message

Copyright © 2025 · Local Business Marketing and Website Design, Brisbane