Alice Springs Golf Club fined for failing to remove man after ‘rapid intoxication’

A POPULAR club has been fined for failing to remove a drunk man who was served multiple drinks within an hour

Beers on tap at Joe's Grand Hotel at Goomeri. Photo Tanya Easterby / The Gympie Times

AN ALICE Springs club has been fined for failing to remove a drunk man who was served about six drinks in an hour.

The Alice Springs Golf Club was given an “unusually lenient penalty” by the NT’s Liquor Commission after the “rapid intoxication” of the patron on the premises earlier this year.

On July 17, the NTLC heard and upheld a complaint against The Alice Springs Golf Club Incorporated and last month fined the business $400.

MORE CENTRALIAN NEWS

Photo of two Vietnam War veterans reading paper surfaces

New committees to give parents and communities more say

Tennant Creek’s new boxing Academy set up to keep the community fit and healthy

On Saturday, November 30, 2019, a member of the public attending a wake at the premises observed a young male being served liquor who was clearly intoxicated and stumbling about.

The commission heard the patron was supplied with and consumed about 6.5 standard drinks in an hour, consisting of a mix of beer and tequila shots.

The commission heard the club had since engaged a new manager and nominee, and taken steps to ensure interim arrangements for the responsible management of the premises were put in place. It had previously had an unblemished record of compliance with the act and its liquor licences for at least 28 years.

NTLC acting deputy chairman Russell Goldflam said it accepted the “club is genuinely embarrassed and remorseful for the contravention”.

CENTRALIAN ADVOCATE digital subscription offer: Full digital access for just $1 a week for the first 12 weeks

“Having regard to all the circumstances of the licensee and the contravention, and in particular the financial hardship of the licensee, a not-for-­profit club, the commission has determined to impose a monetary penalty in the sum of $400,” Mr Goldflam said.

“This an unusually lenient penalty … and should not be considered as a ­precedent.”