Ontario Racing Commission
RULING NUMBER COM SB 007/2010
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – FEBRUARY 23, 2010
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
STANDARDBRED LICENSEE DONALD GILLIS, JR.
Donald B. Gillis Jr., (Gillis), is licensed by the Ontario Racing Commission, (ORC), as a driver, trainer and owner of standardbred race horses, Licence Number 760A57.
On Wednesday, October 28, 2009, Standardbred racehorse TWIN B BEAU, owned, trained and driven by Gillis, was entered as horse 7 in race 3, a one mile pace, at Sudbury Downs Racetrack.
TWIN B BEAU was not competing on Furosemide.
TWIN B BEAU was selected by the Track Judges for total carbon dioxide, (TCO2), testing.
On Friday, October 30, 2009, the TCO2 confirmed test result was 37.9 millimoles per litre of blood.
On Saturday, December 5, 2009, following a Hearing for Gillis, a panel of Track Judges, at Sudbury Downs Racetrack, found Gillis in violation of Rule 22.38 (a) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.
The Panel imposed a penalty upon Gillis which included the following:
(i) a $1,500.00 fine;
(ii) a 180-day full suspension.
On Tuesday, December 15, 2009, Gillis filed a Notice of Appeal.
On Thursday, December 17, 2009, Gillis was granted a stay of the penalty, without prejudice, until Tuesday, February 23, 2010.
On Monday, February 15, 2010, Gillis requested:
(i) that his Hearing be restricted to an appeal against penalty alone;
(ii) that the stay of his suspension be cancelled.
On Friday, February 19, 2010, the stay of suspension was revoked.
On Tuesday, February 23, 2010, a Panel of the ORC, consisting of Chair Rod Seiling, was convened to hear the appeal by Gillis.
Gillis appeared in person.
Gillis was not represented by counsel or agent.
Anthony Williams appeared as counsel for the Administration.
Upon reading the materials filed and upon hearing the submissions of both parties, the panel ordered as follows:
(i) the appeal by Gillis against penalty is denied;
(ii) the penalty imposed by the Track Judges is confirmed:
(a) a $1,500 fine;
(b) a full suspension of 180 days;
(iii) mitigating circumstances will result in a variation of the suspension as follows:
(a) the final 60 days of the full suspension will be subject to a conditional stay for 2 years.
For 2 years, Gillis must:
(i) commit no further violation of Policy Directive No. 1- 2008 (violations of Equine Drug, TCO2 and non-therapeutic Drug Offences); commission of such a violation will result in the imposition of a 60-day suspension, consecutive to any other penalty imposed upon Gillis for such a violation.
Gillis has already served 12 days of the suspension.
The remnant of the 120 days not subject to a stay (108 days) will commence on Tuesday, February 23, 2010, and will expire on Tuesday, June 8, 2010.
DATED at Toronto this 25th day of February 2010.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
John L. Blakney
Executive Director
REASONS FOR DECISION
Overview
1Standardbred licensee, Donald Gillis Jr., appealed a decision of the Judges (SB 41055) wherein he was penalized 180 days (full suspension) and fined $1,500 for violating SB Rules No. 22.38 (a), 22.38.06 et al.
Background
2Anthony Williams, legal counsel for the Ontario Racing Commission (ORC), and Mr. Gillis, who appeared before the Panel representing himself, provided the Panel an Agreed Statement of Facts. Those facts were contained in Exhibit 2, tab 1, paras 3, 5, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, and 47.
3Mr. Gillis confirmed that in agreeing to the foregoing facts, he was admitting that he was in violation of SB Rules No. 22.38 (a), 22.38.06 et al, and that the hearing today was only to deal with the penalty that was imposed by the Judges.
4Mr. Williams stated that, in his view, the penalty imposed by the Judges was appropriate. However, in his view, there were extenuating circumstances. They were his plea of guilty which saved considerable Commission resources, the incorrect notation by the test inspector of the tattoo number of the horse, Twin B Beau and Mr. Gillis’ co-operation in the matter.
5Based on these mitigating circumstances, Mr. Williams proposed that two months of Mr. Gillis’ penalty of 180 days be stayed with the provision that he would not, within the next two years, violate any provision of ORC Policy Directive #1/08. Furthermore, that if any such violation occurred, the stay would automatically be withdrawn and the 60 days would be added to whatever penalty he might incur.
6Mr. Gillis asked that the penalty be shortened more and that, for such consideration, his fine be increased. He asked for leniency stating that he needed to have his licence so he could work.
Issue
7Was the penalty imposed by the Judges appropriate? Should the Panel accept the proposed variance in the penalty based on the mitigating factors as outlined by Mr. Williams?
Decision
8After carefully listening to the testimony and reviewing the exhibits and documentation, the Panel varies the penalty to 120 days. His full suspension will expire on June 8, 2010. Mr. Gillis has already served 12 days of his suspension (8 days prior to filing his appeal notice and 4 days after his February 15, 2010 notice that he was dropping his appeal request and the subsequent revocation on February 19, 2010 post his request to drop his appeal). The