Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal|2013-09-04

For the reasons set out above, we have approved the proposal and made orders allowing the venue to operate with 35 gaming machines, subject to the final version of the gaming conditions set out in the Appendix to this order.
For the removal of any doubt, where the Castlemaine decision confirmed that the Tribunal has a residual discretion (above and beyond the 'no net detriment' test) whether or not to approve the proposal, we see no reason to vary our basic findings. In particular, for the purposes of this discretion, we do not see the proposal as having any particular implications for other gaming venues in the same general region but located in other municipalities.

If the works to L'Unico Hotel, Clayton Road, Clayton (the Premises) as depicted on the plans endorsed pursuant to planning permit 40027 as issued by Monash City Council as amended pursuant to said plan Revision D dated 7 June 2013 (the Works) are not substantially completed by 16 August 2015 (or such later date as agreed to in writing by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation (the Commission), this approval will lapse and the maximum number of electronic gaming machines (EGMs) that may be operated at the Premises will revert to 28. Once the venue operator believes that it has complied with this "substantially complete by 16 August 2015' requirement (or any later date approved by the Commission), it must immediately confirm this in writing to the Commission.

No less than half as to MonashLink or in the event that MonashLink ceases to operate or for any other reason is unable to accept the donation, to another organisation within the City of Monash identified by Council that provides problem gambling or financial counselling to residents within the City of Monash. 2. A committee (the Committee) is to be established to facilitate the allocation and distribution of the remainder of the Community Contribution. The Committee is required to distribute the Community Contribution for the purpose of benefitting the community within the City of Monash in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Commission upon formation. Allocations may be distributed at the sole discretion of the Committee, to not-for-profit incorporated sporting and community organisations providing services to residents of the City of Monash.

The Committee will consist of the following members: 1. A person nominated by Council; 2. A person nominated by the venue operator; and 3. A community representative as agreed between Council and the venue operator.

The Committee is required to meet at least once per year and otherwise at a frequency as agreed between Council and the venue operator, to determine the distribution of the Community Contribution.
The venue operator must provide evidence to the Commission and the Committee of its payment of the Community Contribution annually from the date any of the additional seven (7) EGMs commence operation in the Premises.
If the Community Contribution is not made by the end of each financial year, then the use of the additional seven (7) EGMs must cease immediately for so long as the necessary Community Contribution or part thereof remains outstanding.

[1] With the Commission hearing being on 5 and 6 March 2012.

[3] See the Castlemaine decision at [38].

[5] See the Commission's Point Cook Hotel decision dated 16 May 2007 at [14], the Commission's Sanctuary Lakes Hotel decision dated 16 June 2010 at [36] and the Victorian Court of Appeal's decision in Macedon Ranges SC v Romsey Hotel Pty Ltd [2008] VSCA 45 at [42-43].

[6] In particular, see [106] of that decision.

[7] See the Castlemaine decision at [184].

[9] We refer here to the Romsey decision mentioned in footnote 5 above.

[10] See for example Francis Hotel Pty Ltd v Melbourne CC (Red dot) [2012] VCAT 1896 and Kingfish Victoria Pty Ltd v Melbourne CC (Red dot) [2013] VCAT 1130.

[12] 'Transfer expenditure' in simple terms being existing gaming patronage being re-directed from other venues to the proposed new venue, as opposed to the brand new gaming expenditure anticipated to be generated by the proposal.

[16] Cited in Mr Quick's evidence, para 128

[17] Cited in Mr Quick's evidence, para 128

[18] Cited in table 8.2 in Ms Petersons evidence, pp34

[19] Cited in Ms Rosen's evidence, para 124

[20] Schottler Consulting- Impacts of problem gambling in the City of Monash (April 2013)

[21] A review of Australian Gambling research GRA 2010

[22] Cited in Ms Rosen eveidence para 144

[23] Cited in Ms Rosen's evidence; para 96, Mr Quick's evidence para 98

[24] Cited in Ms Rosen's evidence paras 92, 95 and 96

Monash CC v L'Unico Pty Ltd (Review and Regulation) [2013] VCAT 1545 (4 September 2013)

Monash CC v L'Unico Pty Ltd

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Source

Judgment (28 paragraphs)

Parties

Cases Cited (1)

Monash CC v L'Unico Pty Ltd (Review and Regulation) [2013] VCAT 1545 (4 September 2013)