Court File and Parties
COURT FILE NO.: 417/07
DATE: 20080325
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
A.C.J.S.C. CUNNINGHAM, CARNWATH AND FERRIER JJ.
B E T W E E N:
TODD GRAY Applicant
- and -
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION Respondent
Thomas M. Arnold, for the Applicant
Luisa Ritacca and Brennagh Smith, for the Respondent
HEARD at Toronto: March 25, 2008
Oral Reasons for Judgment
CARNWATH J.: (Orally)
[1] We reject the submission that the Notice to the profession constituted an error of law on the part of the Commission. We characterize the Notice as a declaration of the Commission’s intention to impose a more severe penalty for EPO infractions.
[2] The Commission signalled that in the exercise of its undisputed discretion, it would depart from the guidelines where appropriate. The Notice was one of many such warnings. Moreover, as counsel for Mr. Gray fairly conceded, the Commission had the discretion to impose the penalty it did whether the Notice had been sent to the profession or not.
[3] We reject the submission the penalty imposed was unreasonable. The Commission identified a problem in the industry involving the improper use of EPO. It is the Commission to whom the government has entrusted the integrity of standardbred racing and its decisions deserve deference from the Court, particularly in matters of penalty.
A.C.J.S.C. CUNNINGHAM
COSTS
[4] Costs to the respondent fixed at $5,000, all inclusive.
CARNWATH J.
A.C.J.S.C. CUNNINGHAM
FERRIER J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: March 25, 2008
Date of Release: March 28, 2008
COURT FILE NO.: 417/07
DATE: 20080325
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
A.C.J.S.C. CUNNINGHAM, CARNWATH AND FERRIER JJ.
B E T W E E N:
TODD GRAY Applicant
- and -
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION Respondent
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CARNWATH J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: March 25, 2008
Date of Release: March 28, 2008