ORC 2006

Standardbred licensee Jeff Barkley appeared before the Ontario Racing Commission following a positive test for cocaine.

At the outset of the hearing, Barkley requested an adjournment to tender evidence contrary to the positive test result and to call witnesses.

The Panel granted the adjournment on the condition that Barkley summons all intended witnesses, comply with disclosure rules, and proceed peremptorily on the rescheduled date.

Standardbred licensee Jeff Barkley appealed to the Ontario Racing Commission following a positive test for cocaine.

The licensee did not contest the positive test and presented a joint submission on penalty with the Administration.

The Commission accepted the joint submission, ordering a five-month suspension of his licence and requiring continued attendance for counseling and treatment.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, trainer, and owner, appealed a Director's Ruling that imposed a $1,000 fine and a one-year probation for possessing and using unauthorized medications on racehorses.

The appellant admitted to purchasing substances from an unlicensed supplier to save money, bypassing veterinary prescriptions.

The Ontario Racing Commission confirmed the penalty, emphasizing the need to protect the health and safety of racehorses and maintain public confidence in the integrity of the sport.

The Commission also held that the Executive Director was not required to hold a hearing prior to issuing the ruling, as the appeal process provided a hearing de novo.

Standardbred licensee Adam Kaminski appealed a decision by Hanover Raceway finding his horse ineligible to race in the Balanced Image Race because it had not paid its Ontario Sires Stakes (OSS) fees.

Kaminski argued that 'OSS eligible' meant the horse was sired by an Ontario stallion, regardless of whether nomination and sustaining payments were made.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, with a dissenting opinion, holding that in the context of the race conditions and industry practice, 'OSS eligible' meant eligible to race with all appropriate OSS payments having been made.

Standardbred licensee Terry Fritz appealed a judges' ruling that declared a race a 'No Contest' after a driver was unseated and a horse got loose on the first turn.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the judges correctly called the race a 'No Contest' because all horses were interfered with and a loose horse presents a safety concern that precludes a proper contest.

The licensee appealed a ruling suspending his Ontario standardbred licence pending the resolution of a suspension imposed by the Ohio Racing Commission for a TCO2 positive test.

The Ohio penalty had been stayed by an Ohio court, but on conditions that effectively barred him from racing in Ohio.

The Ontario Racing Commission granted the appeal and lifted the suspension, but imposed strict conditions on his Ontario licence, including mandatory TCO2 testing at his own expense, to protect the public interest while respecting the principles of reciprocity.

The appellant, a standardbred owner and trainer, appealed a Judges' Ruling that fined him $5,000 and suspended him for 6 months for a violation of Rule 22.38(b) due to an excess level of TCO2 in his horse.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal and upheld the penalty, noting the appellant's history of rule compliance issues, including a previous TCO2 positive test within the last year, medication errors, and financial responsibility violations.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a ruling that he violated Rule 15.09(a) by racing a claimed horse outside Ontario within 60 days of the claim.

The appellant argued that the consignor should bear responsibility.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the rule places responsibility on the party who claims the horse, and upheld the $1,200 fine.

Standardbred licensee William Elliott appealed a decision by Woodbine Entertainment Group (WEG) to disallow his horses' entries into stakes races after he received a second TCO2 positive test.

He also appealed the judges' refusal to immediately transfer his horses to new owners.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the judges' normal process for investigating trainer transfers should not be circumvented.

The Commission further held that WEG appropriately exercised its discretion under its rules to refuse the entries, and the Commission would not interfere in what was essentially a private contract dispute absent an overriding public interest.

The appellant, a standardbred owner/driver/trainer, appealed a decision placing his horse fourth for causing interference while off stride.

The appellant argued the break was caused by another driver's whip striking his horse in the face.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that while it was possible the horse was struck, the video evidence did not establish on a balance of probabilities that the whip hit the horse.

The licensees brought a pre-hearing motion requesting additional disclosure from the Administration, including detailed outlines of expected evidence, identification of specific documents to be relied upon, unredacted investigator notes, and all investigation reports.

The Commission dismissed the motion, finding that the disclosure already provided satisfied the requirements of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Commission's Rules of Procedure, and common law procedural fairness.

The dismissal was subject to conditions requiring the disclosure of any future witness statements and a review of investigation reports for non-confidential portions.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a Judges' Ruling that placed his horse sixth for interference and imposed a three-day driving suspension.

During a Gold Eliminations Race, the appellant's horse came out in the stretch run and made contact with a trailing horse.

The appellant admitted to the contact but argued the trailing driver could have avoided it.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that interference occurred and noting that the judges had already reduced the standard five-day suspension to three days due to poor driving conditions.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee and trainer, appealed the decision of the Ontario Racing Industry Board of Appeal upholding the Stewards' disqualification of his horse from second to fifth place due to interference during a race.

The appellant argued that another horse caused the interference by taking away running room.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant's horse shied, causing the immediate interference, and that the other horse maintained a permissible path.

The Stewards' decision was upheld.

Thoroughbred jockey Dino Luciani and trainer Justin Nixon appealed a Stewards' ruling that imposed a three-day riding suspension and disqualified their horse from first to fourth place for interference during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the jockey deliberately bumped another horse to create a path, violating racing rules.

The appeals were dismissed, and the suspension and disqualification were upheld.

The appellant, a standardbred owner/driver/trainer, appealed a judges' ruling that suspended him for 60 days and fined him $1,000 for possessing controlled diuretics (Sodium Edecrin and Furosemide) without a prescription at a racetrack.

The Administration presented evidence that the drugs could be used to mask other substances in both human and equine drug testing programs.

The panel rejected the appellant's explanation that the drugs were for personal use to treat gout, drawing an adverse inference from his failure to testify.

The appeal was dismissed and the original penalty was upheld.

The appellant, a thoroughbred owner and trainer, appealed a Stewards' ruling fining him $1,000 for disregarding the directions of an association official on the training track.

The appellant argued he refused the official's order to remove his horses because he believed the directed route was unsafe.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, holding that a trainer cannot debate safety instructions with the official controlling track traffic during training hours.

The $1,000 fine was upheld to deter disrespect toward association officials.

A jockey appeared before the Ontario Racing Commission after testing positive for a prohibited substance for the second time within 24 months.

The Administration sought a three-month suspension and a one-year probation, while the licensee requested a one-month suspension.

The Commission found that the licensee had an underlying alcohol problem that led to drug use.

The Commission ordered a full suspension for two months, followed by a one-month suspension on weekends, and a one-year probationary period with mandatory drug testing and rehabilitation program requirements.

The Ontario Racing Commission held a hearing regarding the immediate suspension of a thoroughbred licensee.

The Administration alleged that the licensee engaged in a pattern of abusive behaviour, including physical assault and verbal abuse, towards a Commission steward with whom he had an extramarital affair.

The licensee was also charged criminally and breached bail conditions requiring him to stay away from the steward.

The Commission found the allegations substantiated and concluded that the licensee's conduct undermined the integrity of the sport and the independence of the stewards.

The Commission suspended the licence for three years, followed by a one-year probationary period with mandatory counselling conditions.

The appellant jockey appealed a $200 fine imposed by the Stewards for excessive use of the whip on his mount during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the videotape evidence and agreed with the Stewards that the appellant used the whip repeatedly without giving the horse a breather during the stretch run.

The appeal was dismissed and the fine upheld.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a $200 fine imposed by the stewards for excessive use of the whip on his mount during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the videotape and heard testimony from the appellant and a steward.

The Commission found that the videotape did not clearly show excessive use of the whip, noting pauses between strikes and a lack of injury to the horse.

The appeal was allowed and the fine was set aside.