ORC 2010

The appellants, Michael Manders and Kelly Lester, appealed Notices of Proposed Orders to revoke their licenses for failing to disclose criminal records and an incident involving another licensee on their applications.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed Manders' appeal but varied the penalty to a one-year suspension with conditions upon reapplication.

Lester's appeal was dismissed, and her license was revoked.

The appellants were also ordered to pay $1,000 in costs thrown away for failing to appear at a previous hearing.

Georgian Downs and the Ontario Harness Horse Association appealed a decision of the Director of the Ontario Racing Commission denying a request to transfer $40,000 from the Georgian Downs purse account to pay for track maintenance.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the purse account funds are held in trust for the benefit of all horse people and that using them for track operational costs did not meet the required benefit threshold under the rules.

The Commission emphasized its fiduciary duty to protect the public interest and the integrity of the purse account.

Sudbury Downs appealed a decision of the Director of the Ontario Racing Commission refusing to approve the use of purse funds to pay for stall expense credits to trainers stabling at the track.

The track argued the Director breached procedural fairness and legitimate expectations, given past approvals.

The Commission confirmed the Director's decision that the proposed use of purse funds was improper, as it benefited only a limited class of starters and did not meet the threshold of benefiting all or a sizeable proportion of horse people.

However, the Commission varied the decision to allow the stall expense credit for the 2010 racing season only, in recognition of the unique circumstances and to allow time to negotiate contractual remedies for 2011.

Macranald Enterprises Inc. (Sudbury Downs) appealed a decision of the Deputy Director of the Ontario Racing Commission denying its revised 2010 live race date application.

The track sought to compress its 67 race dates into a shorter season, vacating an 8-week period.

The Commission had previously issued a moratorium on race dates for 2010 to prevent substantial changes that could impact the industry.

The Commission found that the Deputy Director's ruling was reasonable, as the application lacked industry support, failed to adequately address horse supply issues, and did not demonstrate how the compressed season would impact the broader industry.

The appeal was denied.

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 driver/trainer/owner, appealed a decision finding he used his whip indiscriminately during a race.

He failed to attend the appeal hearing, having left a voicemail the night before attempting to withdraw.

The Commission proceeded in his absence, upheld the violation based on video evidence and his prior admission, and increased his penalty from a 5-day suspension and $500 fine to a 7-day suspension and $1,000 fine due to his history of similar violations.

The Commission also assessed a $1,500 fine for a frivolous appeal, noting his abuse of the due process system.

The applicants, a licensed horse owner and his racing stable, brought a motion to stay the proceedings against them for alleged hidden ownership of racehorses.

They argued that the proceedings should be stayed due to excessive delay and the Administration's failure to make full and complete disclosure, including information from a 33-month investigation into the owner's father.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the motion, finding that the Administration had met its disclosure obligations and that the applicants had acquiesced in and contributed to the delay.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a ruling that fined him $1,000 and suspended him for 10 days for excessive whipping of a horse during a race.

The appellant argued the whipping was not brutal and merely consisted of light taps.

The Commission found that striking the horse 14 to 19 times continuously during the stretch run constituted excessive use of the whip, regardless of the force used.

Noting the appellant's 15 prior whip and urging violations in the past year, the Commission upheld the penalty, emphasizing the need for progressive discipline to deter such conduct and protect the welfare of the horse.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee and owner of the horse Keystone Raptor, appealed a judges' ruling that found no interference by another horse, Big Bay Point, during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the evidence and found that Big Bay Point drifted out during the stretch run, impeding Keystone Raptor's path and causing a loss of momentum.

The panel allowed the appeal and revised the order of finish to place Keystone Raptor first.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a ruling that fined him $200, suspended him from driving for 3 days, and placed his horse from 2nd to 9th for failing to keep a line in each hand and striking the horse with a whip.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal in part.

The 3-day suspension and $200 fine were upheld, but the placement of the horse was overturned, reinstating it to its 2nd place finish.

The appellant, a quarter horse licensee, appealed a one-day riding suspension imposed by the Stewards for interference during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the video evidence and testimony, finding that the appellant's horse bumped another coming out of the gate and later crossed over, causing interference.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, noting the appellant's representative acknowledged the interference but argued based on other horses' unpenalized actions.

The one-day suspension was upheld.

Daniel Waxman and Vandalay Racing appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to suspend their licenses for failing to ensure horses raced in the name of the bona fide owner.

The parties reached a settlement, acknowledging that while Waxman was not party to any fraudulent transaction, he failed to maintain the required strict separation between his racing operations and his father, Robert Waxman, whose license had lapsed.

The Ontario Racing Commission approved the settlement, ordering that Waxman and Vandalay Racing be ineligible for licensing for seven years, that over $217,000 CAD and $165,000 USD in purses earned by ineligible horses be redistributed, and that the appellants pay $70,000 towards the Commission's investigative costs.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a three-day driving suspension and the placement of his horse from 3rd to 6th for causing interference during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the video evidence and witness testimony, concluding that interference did occur.

The appeal was denied, and the suspension and placement were upheld.

The appellant appealed a Standardbred Judges Decision placing her horse from 1st to 6th for failing to continuously lose ground while off stride in the stretch, contrary to ORC Rule 22.27(c).

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that the horse did not continuously lose ground and upheld the judges' decision, dismissing the appeal.

The licensee, Bruno Schickedanz, requested a stay of a Director's ruling that suspended his owner's licence for 12 months and imposed an $8,000 fine.

The Administration consented to the stay on the condition that a hearing on the merits be held no later than March 4, 2011.

The Chair of the Ontario Racing Commission granted the stay on those terms.

The appellant, a quarter horse jockey, appealed a one-day riding suspension imposed by the Stewards for interference during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the video evidence and testimony, finding that the appellant's horse interfered with another horse and that the appellant failed to take sufficient corrective action with the reins.

The appeal was denied and the one-day suspension was upheld, to be served on the first day of the 2011 racing season.

Standardbred licensee Anthony MacDonald appealed a five-day driving suspension for causing interference during a race.

At the hearing, the Ontario Racing Commission Administration and the appellant reached an agreement to reduce the penalty to a three-day suspension, taking into account a missed day of driving due to a previously cancelled hearing.

The Panel accepted the joint submission and reduced the penalty accordingly.

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 licensee appealed a suspension for misuse of his crop during a race.

A panel of the Ontario Racing Commission previously reinstated a stay of the suspension pending a hearing.

By order of the Commission, the hearing was adjourned sine die on consent, and the stay was maintained on the condition that any further urging violation would result in immediate suspension.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed a Stewards' ruling that fined him $500 and suspended him for three days for violating urging rules during a race.

At the hearing, the appellant requested to withdraw his appeal.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the withdrawal, leaving the original penalty in place, and assessed $200 in costs against the appellant for the late withdrawal.