Adam Chambers

The appellant, a thoroughbred racehorse trainer, appealed a positive test result and penalties imposed by the Stewards after his horse tested positive for Levamisole and Pemoline.

The appellant had administered a compounded medication containing Levamisole on the advice of his veterinarian for a legitimate therapeutic purpose, adhering to the recommended withdrawal time.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that while the positive test was proven as an absolute liability offence and a waiver of the breach was not appropriate, the appellant had established due diligence.

Considering the mitigating factors, including the appellant's excellent reputation and lack of intent to gain an unfair advantage, the panel allowed the appeal in part, reducing the penalty to a $1,000 fine and setting aside the suspension.

The Director of the Ontario Racing Commission sought judicial review of an ORC Panel decision that reduced the penalties of four horse trainers whose horses tested positive for a controlled substance.

The trainers had been found guilty of an absolute liability offence but the Panel reduced their penalties to a nominal fine and no suspension, finding they had exercised due diligence by consulting veterinarians and following their advice.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the Panel's decision to consider due diligence as a mitigating factor at the penalty stage was reasonable and entitled to deference.

Four standardbred racehorse trainers appealed penalties imposed after their horses tested positive for Isoxsuprine, a Class IV drug.

The trainers argued entrapment, officially induced error, due diligence, and waiver.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found no evidence to support entrapment or officially induced error, and insufficient foundation for a waiver.

However, the panel found that each trainer established due diligence by consulting their veterinarians and following prescribed treatment plans for their horses' health issues.

Consequently, the panel allowed the appeals in part, reducing the penalties to a $100 fine and no suspension for each appellant, while upholding the mandatory disqualifications and purse redistributions.