Jabetin Pty Limited v Liquor Administration Board

Jabetin Pty Limited (the appellant) and the Liquor Administration Board (the respondent) were parties to proceedings concerning the transfer of a hotelier's licence and associated poker machine entitlements. The dispute arose from a lease agreement for hotel premises, where the lessor (Jabetin) sought to prevent the transfer of poker machine entitlements by the lessee without its consent. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the transfer of poker machine entitlements required the support of the lessor, and whether the lessor held a financial interest in the hotelier's licence for the purposes of the *Gaming Machines Act 2001* (NSW). The court was also required to consider the interpretation of section 19 of the *Gaming Machines Act 2001*, specifically whether the definition of "financial interest" in subsection (5) was exhaustive and its relationship with subsection (3)(c). Furthermore, the court examined whether equitable or beneficial interests in the poker machine entitlements could arise on the termination of the lease, potentially through constructive or resulting trusts, and whether such entitlements could become detached from the licence.

The court's reasoning involved a detailed statutory interpretation of the *Gaming Machines Act 2001*. It was held that the definition of "financial interest" in section 19(5) was not exhaustive, and that section 19(3)(c) could operate independently to establish a financial interest. The court found that the lessor did not possess a financial interest in the hotelier's licence as defined by the Act, and therefore its consent was not required for the transfer of the poker machine entitlements. The court also considered the equitable arguments, concluding that no constructive or resulting trust arose in favour of the lessor concerning the poker machine entitlements.

Consequently, the appeal in CA 40971/04 was dismissed with costs, while the appeal in CA 40972/04 was upheld.