ORC 2014

The Appellants, licensed standardbred trainers and owners, applied for stays of Orders of Immediate Suspension and holds on their purse monies.

The suspensions and holds were issued following an investigation alleging they facilitated the participation of a suspended trainer in racing activities.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the stay applications, finding a reasonable prospect of conviction based on circumstantial evidence, including telephone records and witness statements.

The Commission held that proceeding with the Notices was in the public interest and that the Appellants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying a stay.

The appellant, a licensed standardbred trainer, appealed an immediate suspension and a proposed order of a two-year suspension and $15,000 fine issued by the Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

The Administration alleged that the appellant continued to participate in racing as a shadow or hidden trainer through a former employee while his licence was suspended.

The panel found that the Administration failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the appellant acted as a shadow trainer.

The immediate suspension was vacated and the notice of proposed order was dismissed.

The appellant appealed an Order of Immediate Suspension and a Notice of Proposed Order issued by the Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

Following an oral decision in a related matter, the parties submitted a joint proposal.

On consent, the Commission ordered that the appellant withdraw his appeal with no costs, quashed the immediate suspension, and vacated the Director's proposed order.

The appellant applied for reinstatement of his standardbred racing licence, which was suspended for violating a Post Violation Agreement.

The appellant argued he used medical marijuana and it did not affect his judgment.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal because the appellant failed to provide a negative drug test as required by the agreement and lacked sufficient medical evidence regarding his capacity.

The Commission also ordered the appellant to pay $665.82 in outstanding monies advanced on his behalf.

The appellant, a licensed owner and trainer, appealed a Stewards' ruling imposing a 45-day suspension, a $1,500 fine, and a two-year probation after his horse tested positive for Acepromazine.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted a joint submission on disposition, ordering a 45-day suspension (with 5 days stayed), a $1,500 fine (with $750 stayed), and a two-year probation with conditions including random searches and out-of-competition testing.

The appellants appealed Orders of Immediate Suspension issued by the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

In this interim decision regarding disclosure, the Vice Chair reviewed unredacted notebook entries of an investigator to determine if further disclosure was required.

The Vice Chair concluded that the redacted portions contained information clearly irrelevant to the proceedings and ordered no further disclosure.

The appellant, a licensed horse racing participant, appealed a ruling and applied for a stay of his suspension pending the appeal.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel denied the application for a stay.

The appellants, standardbred licensees, appealed orders of immediate suspension issued by the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

As a preliminary matter, the appellants sought a review of all redactions in the disclosure materials, including a Senior Judges Report and investigators' notebook entries.

The Vice Chair reviewed the unredacted materials and found that most of the redacted information was irrelevant.

However, the Administration was ordered to provide unredacted notebook entries for 17 days to the panel for review, and to review and disclose relevant information from four additional days of unredacted material.

The appellant, a licensed horse trainer, requested a hearing and a stay of an immediate suspension and proposed order of suspension issued by the Executive Director of the Ontario Racing Commission.

The suspension was based on allegations of acting as a hidden trainer.

The panel denied the request for a stay of the immediate suspension, finding that the public perception and available evidence justified maintaining the suspension pending the hearing.

The panel scheduled the hearing on the merits for July 2014 and declined to impose mandatory time limits on disclosure.

The appellant, a standardbred racehorse trainer, appealed a penalty imposed after his horse tested positive for a prohibited drug.

The positive test resulted from environmental contamination caused by the horse's groom, who took prescribed medication and frequently urinated in the horse's stall.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the appellant established a defence of due diligence, as he took reasonable care and could not have reasonably foreseen the contamination.

The appeal was allowed in part; the $2,000 fine and two-year probation were maintained, but the six-month suspension was deleted.

The appellant applied for a reinstatement hearing after his horse racing licence was suspended in 2012.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted a Post Violation Agreement on consent between the parties.

The appellant's licence was reinstated subject to the agreement, and a $1,000 fine was stayed pending compliance.

The appellant appealed a stewards' ruling that declared his horse a non-starter and refunded bets due to a starting gate malfunction.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that although the horse did not take advantage of the early opening of the gate, the gate had malfunctioned.

To maintain consistency with previous decisions regarding starting gate malfunctions, the Commission upheld the stewards' decision and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant, a licensed driver, trainer, and owner, appealed rulings imposing a suspension, fine, and probation after his horse tested positive for an excess level of total carbon dioxide (TC02).

The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Disposition.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the joint submission, ordering a 45-day suspension (already served), a $2,500 fine ($1,000 stayed), and two years of probation with conditions including random searches and out-of-competition testing.

The appellants appealed a ruling regarding the order of finish in a standardbred horse race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the photo finish evidence and found it inconclusive as to what was protruding at the finish line.

As the Administration bore the onus to establish the result and failed to do so, the Commission exercised its discretion to declare a dead heat for third place, allowing the appeal and ordering the redistribution of purse money.

The appellant, a horse trainer, appealed penalties imposed after two horses tested positive for aminorex, a Class I drug.

The panel heard expert testimony that the only known source of aminorex, other than direct administration, was through levamisole, which was not implicated here.

Given the absolute liability rule but the lack of a determined source for the drug, the panel adjourned the appeal for six months to allow for further investigation into other potential causal links and alternative measures for dealing with aminorex positives.

A conditional stay of the penalties was granted in the interim.

The appellant, whose licence was previously suspended, applied for a reinstatement hearing before the Ontario Racing Commission.

The panel adjourned the hearing to a later date to allow for the receipt of the appellant's latest test result, maintaining the suspension of his access to Ajax Downs and Woodbine in the interim.

The appellant applied for a reinstatement hearing after his licence was immediately suspended.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel accepted an Understanding Agreement between the Administration and the appellant.

Under the agreement, the appellant must obtain an assessment from a substance abuse professional and enter into a two-year post violation agreement.

A $1,000 fine was imposed but stayed, provided the appellant does not breach the agreement.

The appellant, a harness racing driver, appealed a track judges' ruling that suspended him for three days for interference during a race.

The track judges found that the appellant moved out and interfered with another horse, and was not forced out by the horse inside of him.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel upheld the finding of interference, concluding that the Administration met its burden of proof.

However, considering the appellant's motivation to avoid an accident, his openness, and the fact that he had already lost drives as a consequence, the panel stayed the three-day suspension.

The appellants, licensed horse trainers, appealed track judges' rulings that froze their purse monies pending an investigation into allegations of a suspended trainer acting as a 'hidden trainer' using their names.

The appellants sought further disclosure, a stay of the rulings, and to appeal the hold on their purses.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the requests for further disclosure and stays as premature, finding the investigation was timely and full disclosure could compromise it.

The appeals against the hold of purse monies were denied, as the Commission found the freeze was a justifiable intrusion in the public interest to protect the integrity of racing.

The appellant, a horse trainer, appealed a ruling imposing a $2,000 fine, a six-month suspension, and two years' probation following a positive test for a Class 2 prohibited drug in a horse.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the appellant met the burden of proof to show due diligence on a balance of probabilities.

The panel allowed the appeal in part, deleting the suspension entirely while confirming the $2,000 fine and the two-year probationary period.