Kelly

The licensee, a thoroughbred trainer and owner, appealed a stewards' ruling that suspended him for conducting business in a dishonest manner.

The licensee had deposited a cheque belonging to a co-owner into his personal account and failed to inform her or pay the owed amount until after a stewards' hearing was called.

At the Commission hearing, the parties presented a joint submission on penalty.

The Commission accepted the joint submission, ordering a suspension for the remainder of the 2006 Fort Erie meet, a 30-day suspension at the start of the 2007 meet, and a $500 fine.

The appellants, a horse trainer and a groom, appealed a Stewards' ruling that found the trainer violated the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing by improperly transferring ownership of a horse from the owner to his son using his authorized agent privileges.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal regarding liability and the transfer of the horse back to the original owner, finding the trainer breached his duty to the owner by acting without proper authority and preferring his family's interests.

The Commission upheld the $5,000 fine but modified the trainer's suspension to run from July 1 to December 31, 2005.

The appellants appealed a Stewards Ruling.

Prior to the resumption of the hearing, one appellant served a Notice of Appeal from the Commission's earlier ruling.

The Administration moved to quash the new Notice of Appeal.

The Panel found the new Notice of Appeal was a nullity as it had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from its own decision.

The Panel ordered the appellant fully suspended until May 15, 2005, and reserved its decision on the main appeal, restoring the stay of penalty effective May 16, 2005.

The appellant, a licensed standardbred owner, appealed two rulings by racetrack judges suspending his licence and imposing a fine for using improper language and engaging in misconduct prejudicial to the best interests of racing during two separate altercations.

The Ontario Racing Commission upheld the findings of liability, noting the appellant's aggressive and threatening behaviour towards other licensees.

However, the Commission allowed the appeal in part regarding penalty, reducing the total suspension to 20 racing days and the fine to $3,000, while imposing a one-year probationary period.

The Ontario Racing Commission held a hearing regarding Winrac Development Inc.'s failure to complete a new paddock at Woodstock Raceway by the amended deadline of August 3, 2004.

Winrac argued that the delay was caused by its landlord, the Woodstock Agricultural Society, and requested a suspended penalty.

The Commission rejected this argument, finding that Winrac failed to exercise due diligence in obtaining the necessary approvals from its landlord.

The Commission concluded that Winrac failed to comply with a requirement of the Commission and imposed a fine of $20,000.

The appellants, a standardbred owner/trainer and an owner/groom, appealed decisions of the Judges fining and suspending them for allegedly refusing to comply with directions, withholding information, and misleading investigators regarding the transfer of horses from a suspended trainer.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal in part, finding that the Judges' directions were equivocal and the appellants did not knowingly withhold information.

However, the Commission upheld the finding that the appellants misled investigators by participating in a deceptive 'farming out' arrangement.

The fines and suspensions were reduced, and a related suspension of four horses was modified to allow their transfer to the appellants after a specified date.