THE SYDENHAM LICENSING CASES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2573, 26 October 1893, Page 1

THE SYDENHAM LICENSING CASES.

The licensing cases in re the Addington, Newton, and Sydenham East Licensing Committees, were argued before the Court of Appeal at Wellington on Friday, on appeal from Mr Justice Dennistoun. The three Committees in question are committees for three of the new districts into which the Sydenham Licensing District was recently divided, and they granted licenses to certain hotels which were closed by the late committee for the whole of Sydenham. The question is .whether they had power to do so until a local option poll had been taken in each new district authorising an increase in the number of licenses in that district. Mr Justice Dennistoun decided that they had no such power, and quashed the licenses. Messrs Bell, Fisher-, and Stringer appeared for the appellants, and Sir Robert Stout, and Mr Caygill for the respondents. Appellants contended that the local option clauses do not apply to a district newly constituted until the next triennial poll, taken in the ordinary course ; that if they do apply, the poll taken in 1891 for the whole of Sydenham is still in force for the four districts into which it has been divided, and allows the issue of new licenses in each district if they do not exceed the number in existence in 1891; and that section 21 of the Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Acc, 1893, applies retrospectively, so as to make the poll of 1891 apply and validate the licenses in question if necessary. Sir Robert Stout and Mr Caygill, for respondents, contended that the effect of constituting new districts was to put an end to the poll of 1891 and everything connected with the old district; that in any case the poll of 1891 could not apply, because it did not define how many licenses ought to be issued in each new district; and that section 21 of the Act of 1893, though it souhgt to be retrospective, could not apply retrospectively so as to Validate what had been illegally done before its passing. The Court reserved its decision.