One bar owner hailed the High Court decision as "a win for common sense".

Bars in a central Christchurch street fighting a proposed 1am closing time have had "a win".

The High Court has ordered the Christchurch City Council to reconsider its alcohol policy after the hospitality sector raised concerns about its decision-making over Victoria St.

The council's local alcohol policy (LAP) proposed a 3am closing time for bars in south Victoria St, between Salisbury and Kilmore streets, in line with central city bars.

IAIN MCGREGOR/STUFF The High Court has ordered the Christchurch City Council to reconsider its local alcohol policy affecting bars on Victoria St.

It proposed a temporary 3am closing time for bars in north Victoria St, between Salisbury St and Bealey Ave, which would change to 1am after three years in line with suburban pubs.

READ MORE:

* Christchurch City Council Looks To Resolve Alcohol Policy Objections

* Crack Down On Alcohol Sales

* Alcohol Policy Appealed

* Local Alcohol Policy Back On The Table

* Christchurch City Council softens its stance on alcohol policy

* Christchurch's Victoria St 'not the place for late-night bars'

Brett Giddens, who owns Boo Radley's bar, in north Victoria St, called the decision "a win for common sense".

He said the council's decision was "flawed".

"Hopefully they take the opportunity to reconsider the entire process as it has been a substantial waste of ratepayer money to date."

Giddens said a group of affected bar owners had been involved in the review process since 2013, supported by Hospitality NZ.

"The decisions that have come out to date have been very overwhelmingly in support for the bars on Victoria St that took the early risk to establish in the central city," he said.

"Everyone involved in the appeal is still waiting for the council to pick up the phone and communicate what they are going to do to fix this. "

Hospitality NZ (HNZ) said it had "no other choice" but to seek a High Court review. The council spent more than $91,000 defending its policy.

HNZ said the 1am closing time was unreasonable and unfairly "splits" the street. It said the council failed to take into account the district plan.

The council said it was under no obligation to consider the district plan when it finalised its provisional LAP.

Justice Nicholas Davidson QC said in his ruling the council was "caught out" by the timing of the district plan and policy release.

It was not for the court to dispute specific elements of the policy, but it was "not difficult" to reconsider taking into account the district plan "and it must now do so".

"A quite different result may follow."

HNZ Canterbury believed it was one step closer to the end of a four-year dispute. South Island area manager Amy McLellan-Minty said the branch raised concerns about the local alcohol policy as far back as 2013. It had been a "time-consuming, expensive and fraught process", she said.

In September, the council accepted an Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (ARLA) ruling that its policy had 13 "unreasonable" elements that needed reconsidering.













HNZ wanted a policy that encouraged a "thriving" Christchurch hospitality scene that was only just getting back on its feet after the 2011 earthquakes.

Council head of strategic policy Helen Beaumont said it was considering the implications of the decision and taking legal advice.

"The LAP is intended to give the people of Christchurch greater influence over when, where and how alcohol is sold in the city."

The council worked with the community through the special consultation procedure to form the provisional policy. Following appeals, it worked with affected parties to form a revised document.

It settled 17 of 19 appeals, but the remaining two – including HNZ – would likely be heard by ARLA later this year.