Angela Holland

The appellant, a standardbred licensee and trainer, appealed two rulings suspending him and imposing fines after a horse he trained tested positive for furosemide.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard expert testimony that the horse was a rare outlier unable to metabolize the drug normally, and that the appellant had done everything possible to comply with the rules.

The Commission granted the appeal and reduced the fines and suspensions to zero, applying the strict liability defence.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed a ruling that suspended him indefinitely for misuse of his crop during a race and lifted a previously granted stay.

The Ontario Racing Commission convened a hearing to address the lifting of the stay.

After hearing testimony, the Panel adjourned the hearing and reinstated the stay until the appeal date, with the condition that any further urging violation would result in an immediate suspension after riding out his mounts for that day.

The appellants, a licensed owner and a licensed trainer, appealed Notices of Proposed Orders to suspend their licenses for three years following the death of their horse after a race.

Toxicology testing revealed the presence of Reserpine, a prohibited tranquilizer.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the drug was administered after the horse was claimed, but could not identify who administered it.

Applying the Trainer Responsibility Rule, the Commission held the trainer of record responsible as the de facto trainer, but allowed the owner's appeal due to a lack of evidence of his complicity.

The trainer's penalty was varied to a one-year suspension and a $5,000 fine, considering his long history in the industry and candour.

Windsor Raceway Inc. appealed a Director's decision refusing its application to amend its 2010 approved race date schedule by eliminating 15 race dates.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, noting that the racing industry was facing declining revenues and that the Commission had imposed a moratorium on race date reductions to implement a principled, industry-wide framework.

The Commission found that Windsor's application to cut dates was a superficial remedy that did not align with the new framework and that Windsor had not demonstrated sufficient hardship to warrant an exception to the moratorium.

The appellant, a licensed thoroughbred trainer, appealed a Stewards' Ruling suspending him for 45 days and fining him $1,500 after a horse he trained tested positive for the Class III drug Acepromazine.

The appellant argued his Charter rights were violated because the blood sample sent to an independent laboratory arrived frozen and could not be tested.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the Charter motion, finding the appellant was not denied the opportunity to make full answer and defence.

The Commission upheld the penalty, emphasizing the strict trainer responsibility rule and finding the appellant failed to properly guard the horse, as the drug was found in his unlocked tack room.

The appellant, Bruno Schickedanz, appealed a decision by Woodbine Entertainment Group (WEG) to suspend his stabling and racing privileges after his 13-year-old horse, Wake at Noon, was euthanized following a breakdown during a workout.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that WEG acted appropriately in the public interest and to protect the health and welfare of horses.

The Commission held that WEG's exercise of its private property rights to exclude the appellant was reasonable and that no basis for ORC intervention was established.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a 15-day suspension and $1,500 fine imposed for an altercation with another licensee in the grandstand at Kawartha Downs.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that the altercation was retaliatory and occurred in a public place, potentially causing security issues.

The panel denied the appeal and upheld the suspension and fine.

The licensee appealed a suspension imposed for failing to appear at a scheduled follow-up test under the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the failure to appear was due to a genuine misunderstanding and was not intentional.

The panel lifted the suspension and ordered that the licensee's existing post-violation agreement remain in effect without changes.

The licensee withdrew his appeal of a 90-day suspension and $1,500 fine for a positive TCO2 test and breach of probation.

At the hearing, he requested an installment plan to pay the fine or permission to race with his winnings directed to the Commission until the fine was paid.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the requests, noting that granting them would set an unmanageable precedent and that fines must be paid before a licensee can return to racing.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a decision of the Judges suspending him for 45 days and fining him $1,000 for maltreatment of a horse.

The horse was found with severe welts consistent with whipping.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel applied the balance of probabilities standard of proof and the reasonableness standard of review.

The panel found it reasonable to conclude the appellant caused the welts, given his history of temper and post-race whip use.

The appeal was denied, but the penalty was increased to a 90-day suspension (60 days stayed), a $1,500 fine, and mandatory anger management to serve as a stronger deterrent.

The appellant appealed a ruling suspending his standardbred racing license for failing to honour a judgment in favour of a feed company.

After the appellant failed to appear at the rescheduled hearing, the Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal and confirmed the suspension.

The Commission also ordered the appellant to pay $200 in costs thrown away due to his non-attendance.

The licensee appealed a 20-day suspension and $1,500 fine for failing to comply with a vehicle search directed by Ontario Racing Commission investigators.

The panel denied the appeal but varied the penalty, staying 10 days of the suspension, increasing the fine to $2,000, and imposing a one-year probation period, citing the licensee's exemplary record and post-infraction cooperation as mitigating factors.

The licensee appealed a 45-day suspension and $1,000 fine for maltreatment of a horse.

A stay of the suspension had been granted pending the appeal.

The Ontario Racing Commission convened a hearing to determine whether the stay should be extended or terminated.

Upon hearing submissions from counsel, the Commission ordered that the stay remain in place until the rescheduled appeal hearing, on the condition that any interim rule infractions by the licensee would result in the automatic lifting of the stay.

The licensee, a standardbred driver/trainer, requested a reinstatement hearing after being suspended for refusing to provide a urine sample in violation of his post-violation agreement.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the licensee tampered with a sample, a serious offence.

The Commission ordered a $1,000 fine, a 60-day stayed suspension, two years of probation, and mandatory attendance at an after-care program and Cocaine Anonymous meetings.

The licensee, a standardbred driver/trainer, appealed a suspension issued after he provided a breath sample showing a blood alcohol concentration in violation of the Rules of Standardbred Racing and his post-violation agreement.

The Ontario Racing Commission varied the penalty, lifting the suspension but imposing a $1,000 fine, 40 hours of community service with the Standardbred Adoptions Society, a new two-year post-violation agreement, and mandatory enrollment in an after-care program.

The licensee, a thoroughbred trainer, appealed a ruling of the Ontario Racing Commission Stewards suspending him for one year and fining him $5,000 after his horse tested positive for codeine and morphine.

At the hearing, the parties presented a joint submission proposing a reduced penalty of a four-month suspension, a $2,500 fine, and two years of probation with conditions.

The Panel accepted the joint submission with minor variances, noting the absolute liability nature of the offence and the licensee's previously clean record.

Lascelles DaCosta appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke his standardbred racing licence after an investigation revealed he failed to disclose his criminal record and traffic violations on his application.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that DaCosta violated the rules by failing to honestly complete his application.

The appeal was denied, but the penalty was varied to a 12-month suspension (with 10 months stayed) and a $3,000 fine, considering mitigating factors such as his recent clean record and financial responsibility in racing.

The licensee, a thoroughbred trainer, appealed a Stewards' ruling that suspended her for one year and fined her $5,000 after her horse tested positive for caffeine, a Class II drug.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found no evidence that the caffeine came from an external contaminant or previous exposure to coffee.

However, considering the licensee's good record and lack of intent to gain an unfair advantage, the panel allowed the appeal in part, reducing the suspension to six months and the fine to $2,500.

The appellants appealed an order granting the respondents leave to amend their statement of claim to include a declaration that the deceased's estate was entitled to ownership of a condominium based on a resulting or constructive trust.

The appellants argued the proposed claims were statute-barred under the Limitations Act and that the amendments would cause non-compensable prejudice due to the deaths of key parties.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the proposed trust claims fell within the exception in s. 43(2) of the Act for claims to recover trust property retained by a trustee, and thus were not statute-barred.

The Court also found no non-compensable prejudice, as intention could be inferred from documentary and third-party evidence.