Ruling Against Strip-tease

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30794, 5 July 1965, Page 1

Ruling Against Strip-tease

(N.Z. Press Association) WELLINGTON, July 4.

The Wesley Church trustees have been granted an injunction restraining a Wellington restaura, teur from staging strip-tease shows in his Manners street premises. The injunction has been granted ,by the Chief Justice (Sir Harold Barrowclough). The defendant, Emanuel Papadopoulos, is restrained from carrying on any entertainment or other business, not being that of a restaurateur.

The injunction was sought by the Wesley Church trustees and the plaintiff was one

of the trustees, Arthur Donald Priestley, a retired schoolteacher.

The church trustees own the right-of-way giving access from Manners street to the premises operated by the defendant Papadopoulos leases the access.

In bis judgment, bis Honour said the defendant began to stage what he and other witnesses called a floor-show. “It is the defendant’s right to conduct such a show, which is the principal matter in dispute in these proceedings, and it is, therefore, necessary to describe in detail the kind of flow show which is conducted,” said his Honour. He said two men who twice attended the show on behalf of the plaintiff, said in evidence there was nothing which could be classified as a dance. They said that in a series]

of items a girl advanced on to a platform. “The girl advances to music

along the platform, takes off one article after another, until she is down to what we classify as a bikini,” said his Honour. “Then she turns her back to the audience, takes off her bra. the lights go down, and she turns to the audience posing with her breasts bare. “This floor show was not conducted on any property belonging to the church trustees, but the only access is the passageway which is on church property, and it is unthinkable that any church in this Dominion could approve of its property being used as the means of access to a floor show of the kind I have just described.” Sir Harold Barrowclough said whether the church approved or did not approve

was not the question before him.

“That which I have to decide is whether, quite apart from any question as to the morality or decency of the performance, the conduct of the floor-show involves a breach of the defendant's covenant to carry on the business of restaurant proprietor only. “If I am right in my view that the conduct of the floor show is a definite breach of the defendant's covenant, the plaintiff is entitled to have the show stopped.

“And it is of the greatest importance to the church trustees that it be stopped immediately. “This is a breach which cannot be compensated for by damages, and the church is suffering irreparable injury so long as it continues,” said his Honour.