80AGrounds on which Secretary may uphold disturbance complaint

#### 80A Grounds on which Secretary may uphold disturbance complaint 80A Grounds on which Secretary may uphold disturbance complaint > > (1) The Secretary may uphold a disturbance complaint only if— > > > > > (a) for a disturbance complaint for licensed premises in a special entertainment precinct—the Secretary is satisfied, after having regard to the plan under the [Local Government Act 1993](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1993-030), section 202(5)(a) that regulates noise from amplified music in the special entertainment precinct, the licensed premises have caused a disturbance that is unreasonable, or > > > > > (b) otherwise— > > > > > > > (i) when the order of occupancy is in favour of the licensed premises—the Secretary is satisfied the quiet and good order of the neighbourhood in which the licensed premises are located have been unreasonably and seriously disturbed by the licensed premises, or > > > > > > > (ii) when the order of occupancy is not in favour of the licensed premises—the Secretary is satisfied the quiet and good order of the neighbourhood in which the licensed premises are located has been unduly disturbed. > > > (2) For subsection (1), the order of occupancy is in favour of the licensed premises if— > > > > > (a) the licensed premises have been operating as licensed premises longer than the complainant has resided or worked at the complainant’s address or place of business, and > > > > > (b) there has been no substantial change to the operations carried on at the licensed premises since the complainant began residing or working at the complainant’s address or place of business. > > > (3) If the complainant is a person referred to in section 79B(4)(b)–(d), the Secretary— > > > > > (a) must consider the order of occupancy between the licensed premises and residents or workers in the neighbourhood of the licensed premises who are associated with the complaint, and > > > > > (b) may apply the order of occupancy as if a resident or worker referred to in paragraph (a) were the complainant. > > > (4) For subsection (2)(a), the complainant is taken to have lived at the same address, even if the complainant has moved, if the complainant’s new address is within 500m of— > > > > > (a) the address from which the complainant moved, or > > > > > (b) the licensed premises. > > > (5) For subsection (2)(b), a change to the operations carried on at the licensed premises that was reasonably foreseeable at the time the complainant began residing or working at the complainant’s address or place of business, because of the licence in force for the premises and the business or activity to which the licence relates, is not a substantial change to the operations carried on at the licensed premises. > > > (6) Also, for subsection (2), the operations or activities of licensed premises have not substantially changed if the only change is that live music is provided— > > > > > (a) inside the licensed premises between midday and 10pm, or > > > > > (b) outside the licensed premises between midday and 6pm. > > > (7) For this section, the quiet and good order of the neighbourhood may be unreasonably and seriously disturbed only if the alleged disturbance was not reasonably foreseeable by the complainant when the complainant began occupying the complainant’s premises. > > > (8) For this section, the quiet and good order of the neighbourhood has not been unreasonably and seriously disturbed if the complainant could take reasonable steps to mitigate the impact of the disturbance on the complainant but does not take the steps. > > **s 80A:** Ins 2023 No 53, Sch 2\[39\].