ALCOHOL AND GAMING COMMISSION OF ONTARIO
IN THE MATTER OF The : Liquor Licence Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.19, as amended
B E T W E E N:
Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission Ontario
Registrar
-and-
6443338 Canada Inc. O/A Stone House Bar & Grill (The)
Licensee
DECISION
Panel: Bruce Monteith, Board Member
Decision Date: October 26, 2007
Hearing Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario 90 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 300 Toronto ON M2N 0A4 Phone: (416) 326-0366 Fax: (416) 326-5566 Toll Free in Ontario: 1-800-522-2876 Website: www.agco.on.ca
Appearances
Registrar, Alcohol and Gaming Commission ) Joyce Taylor, Representative
6443338 Canada Inc., Licensee ) Youseff Miri
Allegations
- A hearing into a Notice of Proposal number 15240 dated May 10, 2007 to suspend liquor licence number 201229 issued to 6443338 Canada Inc. (the "Licensee") operating as STONE HOUSE BAR & GRILL (THE), 3740 Carp Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K0A 1L0 (the "premises") on the basis of an alleged violation of section 29 of the Liquor Licence Act ("LLA") and subsections 34(1) and 45(1) of Ontario Regulation 719/90 ("O.Reg") made pursuant to the LLA was held on October 2, 2007 in the City of Ottawa.
Decision
- After considering all the evidence and submissions the Board FINDS the Licensee violated section 29 of the LLA and subsections 34(1) and 45(1) of O.Reg. Reasons follow.
Preliminary Matters
- The Licensee, Youseff Miri, stated that he did not have legal representation. He waived his rights and requested that the hearing continue with him representing himself.
Registrar’s Evidence
Andrew Rowntree, Liquor Inspector with Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario ("AGCO"), along with Inspector Stephan Godard attended at the Stone House Bar and Grill at 10:25 p.m. on February 2, 2007, as a result of a complaint received.
The Inspectors were in plain clothes in order to take observations regarding the complaint of intoxication in the premises. Inspector Rowntree sat at a table and observed a male patron with glazed eyes, very red face, slurred speech, uncoordinated movements and who had trouble retaining his balance when he stood up.
The patron was carrying a smallish sized glass which contained, what looked like a mixed drink, orange in colour. As he walked unsteadily out on to the patio area he spilled his drink on himself. The patron lit a cigarette with some difficulty and stood there, swaying. He moved out of sight of the Inspector and a short time later walked back into the bar by a back door still carrying the mixed drink.
The Inspector confirmed that to leave the patio and return to the bar by the back door, the patron would have had to cross an unlicensed area carrying alcohol. The patio and the back door were not connected.
The patron went to the bar, spoke to the owner and ordered another mixed drink and was served. He had trouble counting out the money to pay for the drink while continuing to speak to the owner. He then left the bar and walked unsteadily to a table and spoke to a female, who appeared to be a friend. The Inspector did not see the type of alcohol that was put in the mixed drink but confirmed it was alcohol.
A female server called for last orders and the male ordered another mixed drink which was supplied to him. The patron was still slurring his speech and was showing advanced stages of intoxication. The Inspector left the premises at 11:25 p.m.
On cross-examination the Inspector denied confusing slurred speech with the Ottawa Valley accent.
On re-examination, the Inspector confirmed the drink ordered at the bar the same colour and in the same type of glass as the drink removed from the premises.
Stephan Godard, an Inspector with the AGCO, was with Inspector Rowntree in the Stone House Bar and Grill. His evidence was consistent with Inspector Rowntree’s.
Licensee’s Evidence
Youseff Miri, owner of the Stone House Bar and Grill, agreed that, although the observations of the Inspectors were correct, he did not believe that the patron was drunk as he was drinking orange juice. The patron was tired and not intoxicated. Asked whether patrons became intoxicated by drinking orange juice, he said “no”.
He agreed the patron had removed alcohol from the licensed area.
Registrar’s Submissions
- Ms. Taylor submitted that Mr. Miri had admitted the Inspector’s observations were correct and, as such, the Registrar was seeking findings on all counts.
Licensee’s Submissions
- Mr.Miri made no submissions.
Reasons & Findings
The Licensee admitted he agreed with the Inspector's observations of the patron. His contention the patron was not drunk, only tired, and that the patron was consuming only orange juice is not believable. The patron was drinking from a glass of orange coloured liquid which contained alcohol. Inspector Rowntree testified that he saw alcohol being put into the glass along with the orange juice and that the patron showed obvious signs of intoxication. Therefore, on a balance of probabilities, the patron was drinking mixed drinks and was drunk.
The Licensee admitted that the patron left the patio, carrying alcohol, and walked across the unlicensed rear yard of the premises before re-entering the bar by the back door
Conclusion
For the reasons given, I therefore FIND that the Licensee violated section 29 of the LLA and subsections 34(1) and 45(1) of the O.Reg.
The Board invites written submissions on penalty from the respective parties. The Registrar’s Representative shall serve and file written submissions within seven (7) days of the date of this decision. The Licensee shall have seven (7) days to serve and file his written response. Registrar’s Representative may serve and file any reply within three (3) days of receipt of the Licensee’s response. All submissions are to be filed with the Manager, Hearings Department, Alcohol and Gaming Commission at the address on the front page of this decision in accordance with the Board’s Rules of Practice.
DATED AT TORONTO THIS 26th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2007
BRUCE MONTEITH, BOARD MEMBER
BM/sm