RULING NUMBER COM SB 034/2013
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – AUGUST 13, 2013
NOTICE OF DECISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE JACK MOISEYEV APPEAL
Jack Moiseyev appealed against Ruling Number SB 45574.
Date of Hearing: August 13, 2013
ORC Panel Members: Chair Rod Seiling
Representative for the Appellant: Self represented
Representative for the Administration: Dave Stewart, Agent
The Panel denied the appeal.
A transcript with the Panel’s oral Reasons for Decision is attached to this Notice.
DATED at Toronto, Ontario, this 13^th^ day of August 2013.
Steven Lehman
Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
STANDARDBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, 2000, S.O. C.20 AND THE RULES OF STANDARDBRED RACING:
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF JACK MOISEYEV
Held Before:
Rod Seiling Chairman
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: JACK MOISEYEV, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 13th day of August, 2013.
Appearances:
Dave Stewart, Agent for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: All rise. Please be seated. The issue before me today is did the appellant Jack Moiseyev violate Standardbred Rule 22.03 (j)(vii) on June 20th, 2013 at Mohawk Racetrack. After carefully listening to the testimony and reviewing the evidence and documents filed the panel denies the appeal. Reasons for decision: the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities with the onus of the proof on the Administration of the ORC. Based on the evidence it is reasonable to conclude the appellant Jack Moiseyev violated Rule SB 22.03(j)(vii). The video of the race supports the testimony of Judge Miller and starter Roselle on a balance of probabilities and is preferable and reasonable to deny the appeal. Furthermore, Mr. Moiseyev did not avail himself of the opportunity to speak to Mr. Roselle immediately after the race as per the Rules. It would not be in the best interests of racing to grant the appeal in as much as the policy to have all horses in a race on the gate is to protect the public interest. Furthermore, driver Davis who was not as close to the gate than the appellant accepted and paid his fine of $200.00. The panel took into consideration aggravating factors that Mr.Moiseyev was not at the gate, there was no urgency to get there, he did not speak to the starter post race. The mitigating factor was his difficulty in turning the horse. Thank you. Any questions? The appeal is concluded. Thank you.
CERTIFIED CORRECT _________________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR
Commissioner of Oaths