Stanley Sadinsky

Owners appealed decisions scratching their horses from Ontario Sires Stakes Gold Super Finals after their trainer was fully suspended.

They sought reallocation and redistribution of purse monies to obtain the 1% amount described as a guaranteed starting fee.

The panel held it is a statutory body with no inherent jurisdiction and found nothing in the governing statute or racing rules authorizing that remedy.

Because the horses did not start or finish in the races, the panel also held the applicable rules for the 1% payment were not met.

The appeals were dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

In related horse racing appeals arising from race-day scratches after a trainer's full suspension, the Registrar brought a motion to quash summonses issued to two Commission employees.

The responding parties sought to challenge underlying scratching decisions and, for some horses, redistribution of purse monies to obtain guaranteed starting fees.

The Panel granted the motion and quashed the summonses.

The notice of decision provides the procedural background and outcome without substantive reasons.

The appellant appealed a standardbred ruling imposing a monetary penalty and requiring repayment of purse monies and trainer fees.

A conditional stay had been granted pending disposition of related motion proceedings, and a subsequent motion for clarification regarding repayment was dismissed.

Before the appeal was adjudicated on the merits, the appellant requested withdrawal and the Registrar consented.

The Panel acknowledged the withdrawal of the appeal on consent.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard applications from Rideau Carleton Raceway and Woodbine Entertainment Group for teletheatre licences.

The Commission approved the teletheatre licences for both applicants at their respective sites, subject to certain conditions such as receipt of final building inspection documents and liquor licences.

Additionally, an existing teletheatre licence for Woodbine Entertainment Group at a different unit was cancelled effective upon the opening of the new site.

The applicant, a veterinarian, brought a motion for an order summarily allowing his appeal and setting aside a ruling that fined him for incorrectly labeling diazepam with a 36-hour withdrawal time.

The applicant argued that a previous Commission decision involving another veterinarian had already determined the issue.

The Commission dismissed the motion, finding that a genuine issue for hearing existed because the horse in this case was concurrently taking omeprazole, which could affect the clearance time, and because new information regarding clearance times may have become available since the previous decision.

The appellant, a thoroughbred owner, appealed a Stewards' Ruling that voided the claim of a horse.

The claim was voided because one of the partners in the claiming stable was previously suspended, rendering him ineligible to participate in Ontario.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, confirming that the horse must be returned to its previous owner.

The applicant requested a hearing after his nominations for several horse racing events were rejected by the Woodbine Entertainment Group for being postmarked after the deadline.

The applicant argued that the delay was due to a snowstorm and postal issues.

The Ontario Racing Commission found it had jurisdiction to hear the matter but declined to waive the breach of the postmark rule, emphasizing the need for objectivity and certainty in the nomination process.

The nominations were not accepted.

A thoroughbred veterinarian appealed a Stewards Ruling fining him $1,500 for failing to properly label a bottle of Valium before dispensing it, in violation of Rule 27.20.

The veterinarian admitted to omitting required information on the label but contested the finding that his recommended 36-hour withdrawal time violated the rule.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the 36-hour recommendation was reasonable based on clinical experience and the information available in 2000.

However, the Commission upheld the $1,500 fine due to the serious nature of dispensing improperly labeled drugs.

The owners of a three-year-old trotting colt appealed a decision by the Ontario Horse Racing Industry Association (OHRIA) excluding the colt from the 2003 Ontario Sires Stakes Program for failure to make a sustaining payment.

The owners argued that the sudden death of the managing partner, who had failed to properly register the ownership transfer, constituted extenuating circumstances justifying an exception.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal by a majority decision, finding that the remaining owners had ample opportunity to ensure the payment was made and that the circumstances did not warrant waiving the program's conditions.

The applicant, Fort Erie Race Track, applied for a teletheatre licence for a new site in Niagara Falls.

The Ontario Racing Commission approved the application, granting a licence for the new site operated by Longshots OTB & Sportsbar, subject to the receipt of a finalized liquor licence.

Concurrently, the Commission cancelled the teletheatre licence for the applicant's previous site in Niagara Falls.

Standardbred trainer Curt Bond appeared before the Ontario Racing Commission following an indefinite suspension by the Judges at Flamboro Downs for violating Rules 6.38(f) and 5.11.

The panel found that Bond violated the rules but varied the penalty to a one-month suspension, maintaining previous licence conditions upon reinstatement.

The appellant, a standardbred owner/driver/trainer, appealed a Judges Ruling that suspended him for 10 days, fined him $500, and placed him on probation for one year for using insulting and offensive language toward security personnel.

The incident occurred after the appellant had been drinking and became involved in an altercation with security over the care of his horse.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that while the appellant's frustration was understandable, it did not justify his offensive behaviour, especially given a prior similar infraction.

The penalty was upheld.

Standardbred owner Marvin Chantler appealed a decision of the Standardbred Industry Appeal Board, which found that his horse interfered with another horse during a race and altered the order of finish.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel heard evidence, reviewed the race videotape, and dismissed the appeal, upholding the revised order of finish.

The licensee, a standardbred owner, trainer, and driver, sought reinstatement of his licences after they were suspended due to a positive test for a cocaine metabolite.

The licensee had a history of human drug violations and was on probation at the time of the positive test.

He claimed he did not intentionally ingest cocaine and suggested his drink may have been spiked at a party.

The Ontario Racing Commission rejected this theory, concluding the drug was ingested during a heavy drinking session.

Acknowledging the licensee's progress in recovery, the Commission ordered the licences to remain suspended until May 31, 2003, and imposed conditions for reinstatement, including completion of an outpatient support program and extended probation.

The appellants, a thoroughbred trainer and an owner, appealed suspensions and fines imposed by the Stewards for their alleged involvement in the hidden ownership of a racehorse.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the owner's appeal, finding clear evidence of his involvement in an unregistered partnership and hidden ownership.

However, the Commission granted the trainer's appeal, concluding there was insufficient evidence to prove he knew of the hidden ownership arrangement.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard applications from Quinte Exhibition and Raceway, Kawartha Downs Raceway, and Sudbury Raceway for their 2003 live and intertrack race dates.

The Commission approved the requested dates for Quinte Exhibition.

For Kawartha Downs, the Commission approved the dates and a proposal to reconstruct the track into a dual-purpose facility for horse and car racing, subject to strict pre-conditions regarding facility improvements and track maintenance.

For Sudbury Raceway, the Commission approved a reduced 66-day schedule but required a revised calendar to extend the racing season over eight months rather than concentrating days in the summer, balancing the track's financial concerns with the horsemen's need for an extended season.

The appellant, a standardbred owner and veterinarian, appealed a Judges' Ruling fining him $1,000 for being partially responsible for a positive test result for the Class 4 drug Dipyrone on a racehorse.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal and upheld the $1,000 fine.

The Commission also imposed an additional $1,000 penalty under subsection 11(8) of the Racing Commission Act, 2000, finding that the request for the hearing was frivolous.

The appellant, a standardbred driver/trainer, appealed a ruling that placed his horse 4th from 3rd in a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel heard evidence and dismissed the appeal by a majority, providing oral reasons for both the majority and minority decisions.

Following a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Ontario Racing Commission convened a hearing to consider applications by ten horsemen seeking orders to permit them to enter horses and access Sudbury Downs Raceway.

The applicants had previously been excluded by Sudbury Downs under the Trespass to Property Act following their participation in boycotts organized by the Ontario Harness Horse Association.

The Commission found that while some applicants had engaged in disruptive conduct in the past, the public interest favoured allowing them to return to racing.

The Commission ordered that two applicants be granted full access, while the remaining eight be granted access subject to specific time limitations and conditions regarding future conduct.

The Ontario Racing Commission held a hearing to consider applications from various racetracks for 2003 live and intertrack race dates.

The Commission approved the requested dates for most tracks, including Woodbine, Mohawk, and Flamboro Downs.

Rideau Carleton's request for fewer live dates was approved based on a comprehensive business plan.

However, Sudbury Downs' application for a reduced number of live dates was refused, as the Commission found insufficient efforts to market the live product and an unacceptable reliance on slot revenue.