Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A LEGAL LABYRINTH.

HOTEL AWARDS AND ACTS.

' .. new- provisions of the Licensing Act ; are not tho only worry hotelkeepers cava at tho present time. The amendments to the Shops and Offices Act passed- last session are also exercising them, and are said by some to be a veritable legislative labyrinth. Tho confusion is increased by the fact that some hotels arc working under an award, .others under the Shops and Offices Act, and all are bound by tho. Licensing Act. J. S.' Palmer, president of tho Licensed Victuallers' Association, interviewed by the Auckland "Herald," said that in the Shops and. Offices Act of .1908, with its amendments .of 1910, there ' was a. strong element of inconsistency. In . tho Act of 1908 thero were some 50 sec- -. tioiis, very few. of.-which affected the licensee's.position. The amending Act changed the position considerably, placing x some hotels under, its operations, and . exempting others to a greater or less extent, according to the Arbitration Court awards they might, be under. The sections that did-affect tho hotel licensee were ■ in many respects inconsistent and conflicting in character. For example. Section 3 of the amending Act extended and applied the definitions of "shop" and . "shop-assistant" contained' in Section 2 of the principal Act to hotels and res- { taurants. That section defined a; "shop-- ' assistant" as meaning "any I 'person (whether: a member of- the occupier's family j or . not) who 'is empldyed by the occupier, of a'shop-in or about the business of" the shop,'' etc.' • Sub-section 6 of, Sec- ; tion 5 of the-amending ActVos ! in'cvi: dent conflict "witlr'thls, 'as it declared that -"neither l the wife nor the .children of- the occupier • shall bo deemed to be Assistants within the meaning of the i'Act." Which applied? asked Mj\ Palmer. .. Section : 3, : with its extension of euch definitions to members of the, occu- ■ pier s family, as defined in the principal , Act, ot tho pxemption •of such members?

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19110105.2.34

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1017, 5 January 1911, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
321

A LEGAL LABYRINTH. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1017, 5 January 1911, Page 5

A LEGAL LABYRINTH. Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1017, 5 January 1911, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert