Serving alcohol to an intoxicated customer not proven

ATA/446/1996Court of Justice / Administrative ChamberAug 27, 1996Modified

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The operator of a cabaret-dancing challenged a fine based on LRDBH art. 49(1)(b). Although police later found that the customer had a blood alcohol level of 1.52‰, the court held that liability requires the customer's intoxication to have been recognizable by third parties at the moment of service. Since the witnesses, including the sommelier, did not observe obvious drunkenness when the drinks were served, the infringement was not established and the fine was set aside.

Omnilex headnote

LRDBH art. 49 al. 1 lit. b; serving alcohol to an intoxicated person; recognizability of intoxication. Liability presupposes that the customer's state of intoxication was externally perceptible to third parties at the time of service. A subsequent police alcohol reading, standing alone, does not prove the offense. If the witness evidence does not show recognizable drunkenness when the alcohol was served, the sanction cannot be upheld.

Full text

Descripteurs

RESTAURANT; CLIENT; IVRESSE; AMENDE; JPT

Normes

LRDBH.49 al.1 litt.b

Résumé

On ne peut reprocher à l'exploitant d'un cabaret-dancing d'avoir servi des boissons alcooliques à une personne en état d'ébriété, infraction visée par l'article 49 alinéa 1 litt. b LRDBH, même si la police a constaté que cette personne présentait une alcoolémie de 1,52 0/00 au petit matin. En effet, l'état d'ébriété doit être reconnaissable par des tiers; or en l'espèce, les témoins, dont le sommelier, ont déclaré n'avoir pas constaté que l'intéressé était en état d'ébriété au moment où il s'était fait servir des boissons alcooliques.

Keywords

alcohol serviceintoxicationfineproofrecognizabilitycabaret-dancing

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the operator violated LRDBH art. 49(1)(b) by serving alcohol to an intoxicated person.

Extracted holding

The violation was not proven because intoxication must have been recognizable to third parties when the drinks were served, and the witnesses did not observe such an अवस्था.

Extracted reasoning

The court held that a later police measurement alone was insufficient. What matters is whether the customer's intoxicated state was externally perceptible at the time of service; the witness statements, including the waiter/sommelier, did not establish that.

Serving alcohol to an intoxicated customer not provenAI generated