Smith v Hardy & Anor [2000] NSWSC 1175
Section 57(4) of the Liquor Act 1982 adopts a simple territorial test. Where a licence is proposed to be removed from premises A to premises B, the Licensing Court must determine whether B is within the neighbourhood of A. If B is within that neighbourhood, s 45(2) does not apply and a needs objection cannot be taken; it is not necessary to prove that the neighbourhood of the proposed premises is identical with the neighbourhood of the existing premises. The Licensing Court therefore made no error of law.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 December 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal on a Question of Law Arising Under the Provisions of the Liquor Act 1982 / Supreme Court Summons Seeking Declaration, Quashing of the Licensing Court Determination, and Remittal
- Outcome
- Summons dismissed; plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['removal of Off Licence' 'needs Objection' 'same Neighbourhood' 'licensing Court Determination']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal on a Question of Law Arising Under the Provisions of the Liquor Act 1982 / Supreme Court Summons Seeking Declaration, Quashing of the Licensing Court Determination, and Remittal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether s 57(4) of the Liquor Act 1982 excludes a s 45(2) needs objection where the proposed premises are within the neighbourhood of the existing premises, even if the neighbourhoods of the two premises may not be identical.' 'Whether the Licensing Court erred in law by holding that the plaintiff could not take the needs objection under s 45(2) of the Liquor Act 1982.']
Ratio Decidendi
Section 57(4) of the Liquor Act 1982 adopts a simple territorial test. Where a licence is proposed to be removed from premises A to premises B, the Licensing Court must determine whether B is within the neighbourhood of A. If B is within that neighbourhood, s 45(2) does not apply and a needs objection cannot be taken; it is not necessary to prove that the neighbourhood of the proposed premises is identical with the neighbourhood of the existing premises. The Licensing Court therefore made no error of law.
Court Disposition
Summons dismissed; plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs.
Orders
- ['Summons dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the first defendant's costs."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment