The statute defines several key concepts by cross-reference to the “existing ACT Liquor Act”, meaning the Liquor Act 2010 (ACT) as in force immediately before 1 January 2023 (s 4, definition of “existing ACT Liquor Act”). This freezing of definitions on a specific date creates a static reference point, so subsequent amendments to the Territory Act do not automatically flow through to this statute. “Liquor” takes the meaning from the existing ACT Liquor Act, s 11. “Low-alcohol liquor” is defined via the existing Territory dictionary, which notes it is “a drink that is not liquor but contains more than 0.5% by volume of ethanol”. That means beverages below 0.5% ABV are not liquor at all; between 0.5% and the Territory’s general liquor threshold, they are low-alcohol liquor and still captured by the restrictions in s 11. “Sell” and “supply” are given broad meanings, with “supply” including sell (s 4 notes). “Premises” includes land, structure, vehicle or boat, again via the Territory definition. “University premises” is defined separately in s 4 to include any University building in the ACT, any other premises owned or occupied by the University in the ACT (including campus grounds), any premises in the ACT where accommodation is provided primarily for staff or students, and any additional premises declared by rule or order. This is a broad geographic scope covering not just bars and licensed venues but also residential colleges, halls, University House, outdoor areas, and potentially off-site accommodation. “Authorised premises” are simply University premises covered by a current liquor authorisation (s 4). The statute also creates a distinction between “child” (under 12) and “young person” (12 to adult), mirroring the existing ACT Liquor Act categories (s 4). Notably, the authorisation concept is the central regulatory device. An authorisation is not a property right or a licence under Territory law. It is a permission issued by the Vice-Chancellor, revocable at discretion, and each must state the premises, expiry or period, times of sale if limited, event if limited, persons to whom sale is authorised, and whether liquor may be sold in open containers for consumption on premises or sealed containers for off-premises consumption (s 6(4)). The Vice-Chancellor may also declare other matters to be limitations (s 6(5)(a)) and include anything else considered appropriate (s 6(5)(b)). This gives near-unlimited flexibility to shape each authorisation as circumstances require.

The statute directly affects any entity that sells or supplies liquor on ANU premises in the ACT, and any person who purchases, consumes or possesses liquor on those premises. The most obvious affected group is the University itself and its commercial operators: the Union, caterers, residential college managers, conference organisers, and event businesses that run bars, functions or licensed venues on campus. For these entities, the key change is that they no longer need an ACT liquor licence. Instead they must hold a liquor authorisation from the Vice-Chancellor. That shifts their regulator from the Territory bureaucracy to the University hierarchy. The Vice-Chancellor is the central decision-maker: they issue, replace, accept surrender of, and revoke authorisations (ss 6-9). They must act in accordance with University policies and procedures when exercising these functions (s 10). The University Council is also affected as the rule-making body, since rules and orders about liquor can be made under the Governance Statute (s 12). Staff and contractors who handle liquor at authorised premises are affected by the conduct rules: they must not sell or supply liquor to minors, and must manage possession by young persons in accordance with s 11. Students, especially those under 18, are affected: they cannot purchase, consume or possess liquor at authorised premises, subject to exceptions for employment and training (s 11). Postgraduate students who are adults but under 18 are caught by the young person restrictions. Adult students and staff are indirectly affected because the authorisation system can restrict who may be sold liquor, at what times, and for what events (s 6(4)). A function organiser, student club or society that wants to run a bar at an event must negotiate the authorisation limits set by the Vice-Chancellor. Because revocation can occur for any reason the Vice-Chancellor considers justified (s 9(d)), the discretionary risk falls on any entity holding an authorisation. Visitors, guests and members of the public attending events at ANU are also affected: they cannot buy liquor without a valid authorisation covering that event, and the normal Territory licensing rights do not apply. The ACT Government and its liquor regulator are affected in that their jurisdiction over on-campus sales is displaced - subject to the precise scope of the override in s 5(2) and any residual Territory powers over safety, criminal law and public health not displaced.

The statute creates a set of prohibitions and permissions. The central duty is on any person at authorised premises not to sell or supply liquor or low-alcohol liquor to a child or young person (s 11(1)). This is framed as a positive prohibition: it does not say “only an authorisation holder may sell”, it simply bans sales to minors irrespective of the seller’s status. The duty is strict - no carve-out for reasonable mistake of age or identity. A separate duty lies on children and young persons themselves: they must not purchase, consume or possess liquor or low-alcohol liquor at authorised premises (ss 11(2), 11(3)). The prohibition on possession has exceptions for young persons in the course of employment at the premises, or participation in a training program with a declared training provider or a University-arranged program (s 11(4)). That means a 17-year-old working as a bar attendant can handle liquor, but a 15-year-old attending a residential college event cannot hold an open drink. The right that corresponds to the authorisation is the right to sell liquor, granted by s 5(1): the holder of a liquor authorisation may sell liquor subject to the limitations stated in the authorisation. That right overrides any ACT law (s 5(2)). However the right is fragile. It is limited by the terms of the authorisation, and the Vice-Chancellor may revoke it at any time on any of four grounds: ineligibility under University policy, breach of a limitation, breach of the statute itself, or any other reason the Vice-Chancellor considers justified (s 9). There is no right to a hearing before revocation, and no stated avenue of appeal. The statute creates rights in the holder to apply for a replacement authorisation if lost, stolen, destroyed or damaged (s 7), and to surrender an authorisation by written notice (s 8). The Vice-Chancellor has the right to issue authorisations with any limitations and to revoke them. The holder has no right to renew or to expect renewal; the authorisation simply states when it expires (s 6(4)(b)). The statute also establishes a service of notices regime: documents may be served by email to any email address in University records, including personal or business email addresses, and are deemed received in the ordinary course of email transmission (s 13). That deeming provision overrides the Legislation Statute s 24(4) (s 13(4)), so a recipient who does not check their personal email may be deemed to have received notice of revocation or other action.

The statute does not itself create criminal penalties, fines or infringement notices. It does not specify a maximum penalty for breaching s 11 (selling to minors or minors purchasing, consuming or possessing). This is a notable omission. The statute operates by denying or revoking authorisations as the principal enforcement tool. The Vice-Chancellor may revoke an authorisation if the holder breaches a limitation, breaches the instrument, is or was ineligible under University policy, or for another reason the Vice-Chancellor considers justified (s 9). Enforcement is therefore administrative and contractual rather than punitive in the criminal sense. However the absence of stated penalties does not mean behaviour is unenforceable. The University may still invoke its general disciplinary powers under other University legislation (e.g. the Governance Statute) against staff or students who breach the statute. The statute also does not displace the operation of the criminal law generally. A person selling liquor to a minor at ANU premises may still be prosecuted under the ACT Liquor Act if the sale is not covered by a valid authorisation that overrides Territory law, or if the sale occurs outside the scope of the authorisation. The override in s 5(2) only applies to sales authorised under s 5(1). If a sale is not within an authorisation, or if the seller is not the holder, the Territory Act presumably applies in full. The practical enforcement burden falls on the University’s internal compliance and disciplinary machinery. The University may also use its power to make rules and orders under s 12 to prescribe matters with respect to the sale, purchase, supply, possession or consumption of liquor at University premises. Those rules or orders could conceivably introduce penalty provisions, but only if such penalties are within the scope of the Governance Statute s 68(1) and the University’s general rule-making power. Without express provision in this statute for fines or infringement notices, the primary enforcement consequence is loss of the authorisation. That is a binary outcome: either the authorisation is revoked and the operator cannot lawfully sell liquor, or it is not revoked and the operator continues. There is no middle ground of warning, suspension with conditions, or incremental sanctions within this statute, although the Vice-Chancellor could include such mechanisms in the authorisation conditions.

The statute sits within a hierarchy of legal regimes. First and most significantly, it operates as an exemption from the ACT Liquor Act 2010. Section 5(2) provides that the authorisation to sell liquor has effect “despite anything in any ACT law”. This is a strong override provision. For the sale of liquor that falls within the terms of a valid authorisation, the ordinary Territory licensing requirements do not apply. The statute uses the phrase “existing ACT Liquor Act” to freeze the definitions from the Territory Act as it stood on 31 December 2022. This creates a potential divergence over time: if the ACT amends its liquor laws after that date, the amended definitions do not apply to this statute unless the University amends this instrument or makes a rule or order under s 12 that picks up the new provisions. The interaction is not complete displacement. The Territory’s general criminal law, including laws about public drunkenness, disorderly conduct, drink-driving and assault, continues to apply. The statute only overrides ACT law with respect to the sale of liquor authorised by the authorisation. Territory laws about liquor licensing for non-authorised sales at University premises will still apply. For example, a student running a party in a residential college without an authorisation covering that event would still be subject to the ACT Liquor Act. The statute also interacts with other University legislation. Section 10 requires the Vice-Chancellor to act in accordance with University policies and procedures when exercising functions under Part 2, and notes this is additional to the Governance Statute s 56. The Governance Statute s 68(1) provides a general power to make rules and orders, and s 12 of this statute confirms that rules and orders may prescribe matters about liquor and matters specified in the existing ACT Liquor Act. The Legislation Statute is also affected: the service of notices provisions in s 13 override the Legislation Statute s 24(4) regarding deemed receipt time. The repeal provisions in Part 5 incorporate the Legislation Statute s 26 and the Acts Interpretation Act s 7, so standard transitional rules apply to the repeal of the 2015 statute. The transitional provisions also allow rules and orders to prescribe transitional matters, and those transitional rules can override the rest of this instrument (except Part 5 itself) (s 15). That gives considerable flexibility to manage the transition from the 2015 regime. The statute does not interact with Commonwealth laws (other than the ANU Act 1991 under which it is made) in any express way, but Commonwealth laws on age of majority and employment may be relevant to the interpretation of the young person provisions.

This statute is a replacement instrument. Section 14 repeals the Liquor Statute 2015 in its entirety. The transitional provisions in Division 5.2 manage the changeover. The statute does not provide a detailed history of amendments to the 2015 statute, but the repeal indicates that the University determined a complete redraft was necessary rather than further amendments to the old instrument. The key changes from the 2015 statute are not set out in the text, so comparison requires locating the repealed instrument. However, several features differ from typical previous versions: the explicit freezing of definitions to the “existing ACT Liquor Act” as at the day before commencement (s 4) rather than a dynamic reference, the broad revocation power in s 9(d) allowing revocation for any reason the Vice-Chancellor considers justified (which may be new), and the 10 year expiry date in s 18 (which is unusual for a University statute and suggests a built-in review period). The transitional provisions allow rules and orders to prescribe matters of a transitional nature relating to the repeal of the 2015 statute and the making of this instrument (s 15(1)). Those transitional rules and orders can override the substantive provisions of this instrument (other than Part 5 itself) (s 15(3)). This means the University can, by rule or order, effectively suspend or modify any substantive provision of the statute during the transition, provided it complies with the rule-making process. The Legislation Statute s 26, which deals with the effect of repeal of University legislation, is applied to the repeal (s 16), so rights and obligations under the 2015 statute continue in accordance with standard transitional principles unless modified by transitional rules. The statute also preserves the operation of the Acts Interpretation Act s 7 as applied by the Legislation Act (s 17). This means the repeal does not affect previously acquired rights, existing liabilities, or ongoing investigations unless the transitional rules provide otherwise. The 10-year expiry in s 18 means the entire instrument will sunset on 1 January 2033 unless the University makes a new statute before then. That creates a compliance risk: if the statute expires without replacement, all liquor authorisations issued under it would cease to have legal effect, and the ACT Liquor Act 2010 would apply fully to all University premises without the exemption.

The provided source text contains no references to case law, court decisions, or litigation history. The statute itself is recent (commencing 1 January 2023) and there is no judicial consideration cited in the instrument. The absence of litigation history in the text likely reflects that the statute has not been tested in court, or at least no cases are mentioned in the instrument itself. The previous statute (the Liquor Statute 2015) may have been involved in litigation, but the source does not record any. The broad discretionary powers in this statute, particularly the revocation power under s 9(d) (any reason the Vice-Chancellor considers justified) and the override of Territory law under s 5(2), are potential sources of future legal challenge. A person whose authorisation is revoked for an undisclosed “other reason” might seek judicial review on grounds of procedural fairness or ultra vires. The service of notices provisions (s 13) could also generate disputes about whether deemed receipt is reasonable in particular circumstances. However, no such disputes are documented in the provided text. Any analysis of future litigation risk must be based on legal principle, not on source-grounded case facts. The statute’s interaction with the ACT Liquor Act may also generate jurisdictional questions if the Territory regulator attempts to assert authority over on-campus sales that the University claims are within the authorisation. The override provision is strong in its language (“despite anything in any ACT law”) but its scope depends on whether the sale is genuinely “subject to the limitations stated in the authorisation” (s 5(1)). If an authorisation is exceeded, the override does not apply, and the Territory Act may reassert itself. The boundaries of that protection could be litigated.

Several features of this statute could trap the unwary. First, the definition of “University premises” is extremely broad. It includes not just buildings but any premises owned or occupied by the University in the ACT, including grounds, as well as any premises in the ACT where accommodation is arranged by the University primarily for staff or students (s 4). That could cover off-campus student housing, private rental properties arranged through University accommodation services, and even temporary venues used for University events. Any entity selling liquor at such a location without a University authorisation may be operating outside the Territory licensing system and also outside the protection of s 5(2). Second, the definitions are frozen as at 31 December 2022. If the ACT Liquor Act changes its definition of “liquor” to capture new substances, or changes the definition of “sell” to cover new business models, this statute does not automatically update. An operator relying on the Territory’s current definitions might inadvertently breach if the University does not amend its statute. Third, the revocation power in s 9(d) is essentially unfettered. The Vice-Chancellor can revoke an authorisation for a reason not stated in the instrument, without needing to prove breach or ineligibility. There is no requirement for natural justice in the text , no hearing, no written reasons, no appeal. The only constraint is that the Vice-Chancellor must act in accordance with University policies and procedures (s 10(1)), but those policies are not part of this statute and can be changed. Fourth, s 13 allows service of notices by email to any address in University records, including personal email addresses, and deems receipt at the time it would be received in the ordinary course of email transmission. That overrides the Legislation Statute s 24(4). An authorisation holder who does not check their personal email, or whose spam filter catches the notice, may be deemed to have received a revocation notice and could be found to have sold liquor without authorisation if they continue. Fifth, the prohibition in s 11(1) on selling or supplying liquor to a child or young person is not limited to the authorisation holder; it applies to “a person”. Any staff member, student volunteer, or contractor who hands a drink to someone under 18 at an authorised premises breaches the statute. The exceptions for young persons possessing liquor in the course of employment or training (s 11(4)) only apply to possession, not to purchase or consumption. A 17-year-old employee can handle stock but cannot buy or drink it. Sixth, the expiry date in s 18 is fixed at 10 years. If the University does not renew or remake the statute before 1 January 2033, the entire regime collapses and all authorisations become void. Operators who assume the regime is permanent may be caught out. Seventh, the transitional rules made under s 15 can override any provision of the statute except Part 5 itself. That means during the transition from the 2015 regime, the University could by rule change how the statute operates without amending the statute itself, creating uncertainty for authorisation holders who do not track the rules.

Any entity wishing to sell liquor on ANU premises in the ACT must first obtain a liquor authorisation from the Vice-Chancellor under s 6(1). The application process is not detailed in the statute itself, but the Vice-Chancellor must act in accordance with University policies and procedures (s 10). The applicant should identify the specific premises, the proposed hours or period of operation, whether the sale is for a particular event, the target customers, and whether liquor will be sold for consumption on or off the premises (s 6(4)). The authorisation will state these as limitations, and compliance with each is mandatory. Before applying, the entity should verify that the premises fall within the s 4 definition of “University premises”. If the venue is University-owned or occupied, or used for University accommodation, it likely qualifies. If in doubt, the entity should seek confirmation from the Vice-Chancellor or relevant University office. The holder must not exceed the terms of the authorisation. Selling liquor outside the authorised premises, at times not stated, to persons not covered, or for an event not listed would breach the authorisation and trigger revocation under s 9(b). The holder must ensure that no person sells or supplies liquor or low-alcohol liquor to a child (under 12) or young person (12 to adult) at the authorised premises (s 11(1)). The exceptions for young persons possessing liquor in the course of employment or training (s 11(4)) only cover possession, not purchase or consumption. Responsible service of alcohol practices should include age verification procedures and training for all staff and volunteers. The holder should also ensure that children and young persons do not purchase, consume or possess liquor at the premises (ss 11(2), 11(3)). This requires monitoring of all patrons, not just those being served. The holder must keep the authorisation secure. If issued in written form and lost, stolen or damaged, the holder should apply to the Vice-Chancellor for a replacement (s 7). If the holder wishes to stop selling liquor, they should surrender the authorisation by written notice to the Vice-Chancellor and return any written copy (s 8). The holder must maintain accurate contact details with the University, as notices including revocation can be served by email to any address in University records, including personal email (s 13). Checking that email regularly is essential to avoid deemed receipt of adverse notices. The holder should also monitor any rules or orders made under s 12, as these may prescribe additional requirements about the sale, purchase, supply, possession or consumption of liquor. Non-compliance with a rule or order could also ground revocation under s 9(c). Finally, the holder should note the 10-year expiry of the statute (s 18). Long-term operators should track the expiry and ensure timely application for any new regime that replaces this statute. If the statute expires without replacement, all authorisations lapse and the ACT Liquor Act 2010 applies fully.