The public-interest test has long been a cornerstone of liquor licensing decisions in Western Australia but some experts argue the benchmark has been applied more strictly in recent times.
Law firm Lavan Legal, well-known for its practice in liquor licensing, believes that evidence lodged in support of licence applications is being scrutinised far more thoroughly than in the past.
Lavan said the public-interest element had been a part of the Liquor Control Act for a long time but that recent decisions showed the public interest assessment had become more stringent.
“It appears reasonable to conclude that applicants for liquor licences do now face a significantly more difficult assessment process than in times past,” Lavan partner Dan Mossenson said.
“Five out of the nine published decisions in January to February were refused. In the preceding two months only one out of seven failed.
“The honeymoon period since the introduction of the Act in May 2007 appears to be over.”
But the department of racing, gaming and liquor, maintains that applications are assessed through long-standing criteria and that the public-interest test has not been given extra weight.
A spokesman from the department said the public-interest test had been in the Act since 1988 and that the burden had always been on the applicant to prove that the licence was in the public interest.
Criteria for the public-interest test include the harm or ill health caused by the use of liquor, the impact on the local amenity of the venue and whether people in the vicinity of the venue are affected negatively.
In a recent note to stakeholders, liquor licensing director Barry Sargeant said: “The private interest of an applicant wishing to establish a liquor outlet is not to be confused with the public interest.
“The requirements of the Act are directed at the licensing authority taking a balanced approach to the granting of new applications.”
In 2007, when small-bar licences were added in WA, 125 licences were granted in total, compared to 177 in 2008-09, 189 in 2009-10, 165 in 2010-11 and 127 in the current financial year.
Of the 13 different licence categories, six had fewer licences granted in 2010-11 compared to 2009-10, four had more granted and three stayed the same.
The department said petitions, despite being a popular tool to prove a licence, were not enough to prove public interest.
“These petitions provide no value (of proof), have no rigour in terms of questions and responses capable of being tested and are simply a signed statement of support,” the spokesman told WA Business News.
“However, properly formed petitions may form part of a more detailed suite of evidence presented by an applicant in support of their application, but in their own they are of little value.”
There was a view that it was more difficult to obtain a licence in heavily traded liquor areas.
When it comes to Northbridge and the Perth CBD, the department said there was a well-established base of evidence in relation to alcohol-related harm in the area.
“The onus is therefore upon an applicant to address both the positive and negative impacts that the grant of the application will have on the local community,” the spokesman said.
“It is not sufficient for applicants to merely express opinions about the perceived benefits of their application without an appropriate level of evidence to support those opinions and assertions.
“The licensing authority must also weigh and balance the requirements of consumers against the object of minimising harm or ill-health caused to people, or any group of people, due to the use of liquor.”
