Ontario Racing Commission
RULING NUMBER COM SB 029/2009
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO AUGUST 19, 2009
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER IN THE APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF STANDARDBFED LICENSEE MITCHELL SAHELY
On March 13, 2009, the Judges at Woodbine issued Standardbred Official Ruling SB 40326 to Mitchell C. Sahely ("SAHELY") wherein he was fined $100 for "failure to keep his feet in the stirrups while driving 'Captain Sparrow' in the 1st race at Woodbine on March 6, 2009, in the stretch drive", contrary to Rule 22.19 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.
On March 18, 2009, the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission ("ORC") issued Ruling Number SB 35/2009 whereby SAHELY's penalty was stayed pending the disposition of his appeal.
On May 19, 2009, the Ontario Racing Industry Board of Appeal heard SAHELY's appeal. The Board of Appeal denied SAHELY's appeal and upheld Standardbred Official Ruling SB 40326.
On May 27, 2009, SAHELY filed an appeal to a Panel of the ORC.
On May 29, 2009, the Executive Director of the ORC issued Ruling Number SB 69/2009 whereby SAHELY's penalty was stayed until such time as his appeal is heard by a Panel of the ORC.
On August 19, 2009, a Panel of the ORC, comprised of Chair Rod Seiling, Commissioner Brenda Walker and Commissioner Bernard Brennan, DVM, was convened to hear SAHELY's appeal.
Jennifer Friedman appeared as counsel for the Administration. SAHELY attended the Hearing and was unrepresented.
Upon hearing the testimony of ORC Judge Jim Thatcher and SAHELY, reviewing the film and the exhibits filed, and upon hearing the closing submissions, the Panel denied SAHELY's appeal.
The Panel ordered SAHELY to pay $750 on the basis of a frivolous appeal, in accordance with subsection 11(8) of the Racing Commission Act.
The transcript with the Panel's Reasons for Decision is attached to this Ruling.
DATED at Toronto this 2nd day of October, 2009.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
John L. Blakney Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
STANDARDBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF MITCHELL SAHELY:
Held Before: Rod Seiling, Chairman Brenda Walker, Commissioner Brendan Brennan, Commissioner
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: MITCHELL SAHELY, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 1410, Toronto, Ontario, on the 19th day of August, 2009.
Appearances: Jennifer Friedman, for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: All rise please. Please be seated. After reviewing the testimony, the evidence and submissions the panel denies Mr. Sahely's appeal. The video of the first race on March 6th, 2009 at Woodbine clearly shows Mr. Sahely's right foot out of the stirrups and hitting the horse's hock twice. This is a violation of Standardbred Rule 22.19. Judge Thatcher testified that in his reviewing of the video replay he was not able to positively conclude that Mr. Sahely's toe was in contact with the stirrup at all times. Notwithstanding Mr. Sahely's argument that he was in contact with the stirrup the intent of the rule is to have the full foot in the stirrup. As Judge Webb's testimony at the Industry Appeal Board the purpose is to ensure the safety of the horse and participants. The Rules of Racing prohibit drivers from having their whips come into contact with a horse below the level of the shaft. Allowing a driver to use his or her foot to accomplish the same objective would in effect nullify the purpose of that rule.
With respect to the frivolous appeal the panel agrees with the Administration's request to assess the frivolous appeal provision as per subsection 11.08 of the Racing Commission Act. Mr. Sahely did not offer any new evidence to support his appeal. The Commission recognizes the licensee's right to due process. Licensees have an obligation not to abuse this right. The industry deservedly expects the Commission to use the funding it provides efficiently and judiciously. Three hearings without any new evidence is an abuse of that process. Therefore, Mr. Sahely is fined $750.00. Any questions?
MS. FRIEDMAN: No, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
CERTIFIED CORRECT:____________________________ RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR Commissioner of Oaths