RULING NUMBER COM QH 001/2014
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – APRIL 11, 2014
NOTICE OF DECISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE HEARING OF DAVID WARD
On November 29, 2013, David Ward (“Ward”) was issued Ruling Number QH ADMIN 6/2013 wherein his licence was immediately suspended.
On March 30, 2014, Ward applied for a Reinstatement Hearing.
Date of Hearing: April 11, 2014
ORC Panel Members: Commissioner John W. Macdonald
Commissioner Sandra Meyrick
Representative for Appellant: Robert King, Jr., National Manager
Jockey’s Benefit Association of Ontario
Counsel for the Administration: Jennifer Friedman
The Panel accepted an Understanding Agreement between the ORC Administration and Mr. Ward.
A transcript with the Panel’s oral Reasons for Decision is attached to this Notice.
DATED at Toronto this 21st day of April 2014.
______________________________
Steven Lehman
Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
THOROUGHBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, 2000, S.O. C.20 AND THE RULES OF THOROUGHBRED RACING:
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF DAVID WARD:
Held Before:
John Macdonald Chairman
Sandra Meyrick Commissioner
These are an excerpt of the proceedings in the above mentioned matter held before The Ontario Racing Commission, Re: DAVID WARD, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 11th day of April, 2014.
Appearances:
Jennifer Friedman, for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
Robert King, agent for the appellant David Ward
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: The recommendations are set out in paragraph 2 of Part 3 and that's been accepted?
MS. FRIEDMAN: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And for the purposes of the record, counsel, I will read that. Understanding agreement between ORC Administration and Mr. King on behalf of Mr. Ward and Mr. Ward himself agreeing to this. He is to obtain an assessment from a substance abuse professional with the understanding that this is something that can be accomplished within less than a week or we might have to re-attend if there is any problem there and then following the recommendation of the substance abuse professional that will be a part of a new post violation agreement and that agreement would be entered into for a period of two years and counsel, that will be two years from this date?
MS. FRIEDMAN: Two years from the date of signature so it will probably be signing within the next two weeks so from that date for a period of two years.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, the operative date I'm looking for, would that be tied into the date of the report from the substance abuse professional?
MS. FRIEDMAN: No, it would be tied into the date that the PVA has been signed so two years from the date of signature.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Right and the next one was any monies owing to the ORC. Is the fine still outstanding?
MS. FRIEDMAN: No fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Pardon?
MS. FRIEDMAN: No fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I thought there was a $500.00 fine initially.
MR. KING: That was paid for from what I understand and all the attached from the first violation.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That was my question. Thank you.
MS. FRIEDMAN: There are no other.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And sub paragraph (e), is that still in effect?
MS. FRIEDMAN: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So $1,000.00 fine. That is subject to a stay and the stay will expire if Mr. Ward engages in any breach of the post violation agreement. Correct?
MS. FRIEDMAN: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anything else, counsel?
MS. FRIEDMAN: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, so ordered.
CERTIFIED CORRECT__________________________________
RAYMOND P. MACDONALD, B.A., CVR
Commissioner of Oaths