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 of Ontario Registrar
-and-
6217788 Canada Inc. operating as Section 222/Lotus Lounge Licensee
DECISION
Panel: David C. Gavsie, Chair, AGCO Alex McCauley, Board Member
Decision Date: January 12, 2010
Hearing Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario 90 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 300 Toronto, Ontario 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
6217788 Canada Inc., Licensee ) Michael Smith, Representative
Allegations
- A hearing into Notice of Proposal (“NOP”) number 16522 dated July 24, 2008 to suspend liquor licence number 21421 (the “licence”) issued to 6217788 Canada Inc. (the “Licensee”), operating as SECTION 222/LOTUS LOUNGE, 222 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5H8 (the “establishment” or “premises”) on the basis of alleged violations of sections 43, 45.1 and 45.2 and subsection 45(1) of Ontario Regulation 719/90 (the “O.Reg”) made pursuant to the Liquor Licence Act (the “LLA”) was held on July 24, September 8, October 1, and October 15, 2009 in the City of Ottawa.
Decision
- After considering all the evidence and submissions, the Board FINDS the Licensee violated sections 43 and 45.2 of the O.Reg and DISMISSES the allegation of violations of section 45.1 and subsection 45(2) of the O.Reg. Reasons follow.
Preliminary Matters
- The Board ORDERED the exclusion of all witnesses.
Registrar’s Evidence
Angela Kay is a member of the Ottawa Police Service (the “OPS”), and has seven years experience. She is familiar with the licensed premises in question and attended there as part of her police duties in the early morning of July 2, 2008.
Constable (“Cst.”) Kay attended the establishment in response to a call for assistance which had emanated from the bouncer known as “Frenzy”, who had called in the complaint via his cell phone. The call regarded a dangerous, unwanted male person in the establishment.
Upon arrival with other officers, they met with the manager who stated everything was all right and asked the police to leave. In the meantime Sergeant (“Sgt.”) Lapointe arrived on scene and spoke to the owner. After her discussion with the owner, Sgt. Lapointe directed that the bar be shut down for the rest of the evening, this being at approximately 1:35 a.m.
Cst. Kay entered the licensed premises with Sgt. Lapointe. She remained by the door and Sgt. Lapointe, along with the manager, went into the interior of the premises and spoke to the D.J.
Cst. Kay stated that the patrons began to exit, they were not happy at having to leave and many made obnoxious comments toward the police.
Cst. Kay, when asked about the condition of the exiting patrons, could not be specific, but did state that some displayed signs of impairment.
Cst. Kay stated that it took approximately 15 minutes for the premises to empty.
Cst. Kay stated that as this was going on, the D.J. was making derogatory comments directed toward the police as to why the premises were being closed. The comments were inciting the crowd’s displeasure towards the police.
When the witness returned outside, officers were present and the crowd was slowly beginning to disperse.
Outside the premises, there was an altercation taking place between two female patrons. The dispute was stopped and the patrons left the immediate area.
There were a lot of patrons congregating in a parking lot and courtyard area across the street. It was in this area that she observed a vehicle being operated erratically. She