ORC 2012

Sudbury Downs Raceway appealed an Order to Comply regarding the condition of its racetrack.

Prior to the hearing, the parties reached an agreement to amend the condition to include a two-year probationary period and for Sudbury Downs to withdraw its appeal and pay $650 in costs.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the withdrawal of the appeal on the agreed terms and ordered the payment of costs.

The Ontario Harness Horse Association (OHHA) appealed a ruling by the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission ordering it to pay $100,000 for investigation costs.

The costs were imposed as a condition for the issuance of a 2005 Purse Account Manager's Licence.

The Panel allowed the appeal, finding that while the costs were reasonable, OHHA never consented to the terms of the 2005 licence.

Because OHHA did not accept the terms, the licence was never issued, and the ORC's claim for the $100,000 in costs ended.

The appellant appealed the Ontario Racing Commission's 2012 schedule of race dates for Sudbury Downs, requesting that three race dates in November be moved to December.

The panel denied the appeal, finding that the requested changes were not supported by horse supply or customer demand, and that the original dates were assigned in accordance with the principles of the Ontario Racing Program.

The appellant appealed against the Director's Proposed Order to Refuse to Issue a Licence.

The appellant failed to appear at the scheduled hearing before the Ontario Racing Commission.

Consequently, the panel upheld the Director's Order.

The appellant jockey appealed a Stewards' ruling suspending him for two years for possessing an electrical device in the starting gate during a quarter horse race.

The horse reacted violently in the gate, and an electrical device was subsequently found on the track in the exact location of the appellant's stall.

Although there was no direct evidence of possession, the Ontario Racing Commission found that the overwhelming circumstantial evidence established the violation on a balance of probabilities.

The appeal was dismissed, and the penalty was varied to a five-year suspension with three years stayed, resulting in a net two-year suspension.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed a $500 fine issued by the Stewards for gross misconduct and uttering profanities at a racing official.

At the hearing, the appellant admitted to violating the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal but reduced the fine to $400, taking into account the difficult circumstances facing horse people at Fort Erie Racetrack as a mitigating factor.

Todd Kabel, a licensed jockey, submitted an Application for Reinstatement following a ruling by the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

A panel of the ORC convened to hear the application.

Upon considering the exhibits, including a Post Violation Agreement and a joint submission, the panel allowed the conditional reinstatement of Kabel's licence.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a Judges' Ruling that fined him $300 and imposed a 5-day driving suspension for striking the shaft of the race bike with his whip during a race, in violation of Rule 22.23.03(d) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The appellant admitted the rule violation, and the hearing proceeded on penalty only.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel dismissed the appeal, upholding the fine and suspension.

The panel considered aggravating factors, including the appellant's previous record, the number of times the rule was violated during the race, and the aggressive nature of the hits, concluding that the penalty was necessary to serve as a deterrent and protect the horse and public interest.

The appellant appealed a Judges' ruling that placed his horse from 4th to 7th for going inside the pylons and gaining an unfair advantage during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that the video evidence clearly showed the horse inside at least seven pylons, supporting the rule violation on a balance of probabilities.

Masterfeeds appealed a ruling regarding a positive test for Ractopamine in a horse trained by Robert Earl Barnett.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal as it pertained to Masterfeeds, declaring its feed products were not the source of the contamination.

Following a pre-hearing conference, Barnett and the ORC Administration agreed to a joint submission on penalty, resulting in a $5,000 fine ($3,500 stayed) and one year of probation with standard terms.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a 5-day driving suspension and $300 fine for using his whip in an indiscriminate manner during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the evidence, including the race video and testimony of the judge, and concluded that the appellant violated Rule 22.23.01(a).

The appeal was denied and the penalty was upheld.

The appellant, a standardbred trainer, appealed a Judges' Ruling fining him $200 for failing to have his horse in the paddock within the prescribed time, in violation of Rule 26.12 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding on a balance of probabilities that the appellant blatantly violated the rule.

The $200 fine was upheld, and although the Administration requested costs for a frivolous appeal, the panel declined to award them given the appellant's travel costs.

Carolyn Costigan, trainer of the horse Nancy O (IRE), appealed a decision of the Stewards regarding the 6th race at Woodbine Racetrack.

She alleged that another horse, Spring Venture, interfered with her horse at the start of the race, warranting a placing change.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the video and heard testimony from the Stewards, jockeys, and trainers.

The panel found that the contact between the horses was incidental and did not warrant a placing change, noting that the appellant's jockey did not check his horse or claim a foul.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, a licensed jockey, applied for reinstatement of his licence after failing to adhere to the conditions of his Post-Violation Agreement.

The Ontario Racing Commission ordered the reinstatement of the appellant subject to conditions, including an extension of his Post-Violation Agreement for 19 months and the provision of documentation regarding his treatment and aftercare program.

Trainer Josie Carroll appealed a Stewards' ruling that disallowed a claim of foul following a thoroughbred race.

The Ontario Racing Commission convened a hearing, but the appellant failed to appear.

At the request of the owner and the Administration, the Panel dismissed the appeal.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a Judges' ruling that placed two of her horses on the Judges' List and refused their declaration to race.

During the hearing, an agreement was reached to facilitate a trainer transfer, allowing the horses to race subject to conditions regarding access by investigators and the non-involvement of a specific individual.

Following this agreement, the appellant withdrew her appeal.

The standardbred licensee appealed a Director's order of immediate suspension and a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke and suspend his licence for five years.

At the hearing, the Administration advised that it would call no evidence and consented to the ruling.

The Commission Panel ordered that the immediate suspension and Notice of Proposed Order be set aside, and directed that the licensee is eligible to apply to be re-licensed in accordance with section 17 of the Racing Commission Act, 2000.

The appellants appealed a Thoroughbred Official Ruling that imposed a three-day riding suspension on the jockey for interference and changed the horse's order of finish from 1st to 4th.

The Ontario Racing Commission upheld the three-day suspension, finding that the jockey's horse did come over and cause interference.

However, the Commission revised the order of finish for the top four horses, finding that another horse also caused interference.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee and trainer, appealed a Stewards' ruling regarding a claim of foul.

The jockey of the appellant's horse alleged interference by another horse during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the video evidence and testimony, concluding on a balance of probabilities that no interference occurred.

The appeal was denied and the original order of finish was upheld.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a ten-day driving suspension issued by the Judges for causing an accident during a race.

During the hearing before the Ontario Racing Commission, the appellant requested an adjournment to obtain further exhibits.

The Panel granted the continuance, with the hearing to be rescheduled.