Ontario Racing Commission

A standardbred driver appealed a judges' ruling that placed his horse from 4th to 7th for causing interference while off stride.

The driver brought preliminary motions regarding disclosure and the absence of a specific judge, which the panel dismissed.

After reviewing race tapes and hearing testimony, the panel found that the driver's horse made a break and caused another horse to check and go off stride.

The appeal was disallowed and the placing was upheld.

The licensee appealed to the Ontario Racing Commission to upgrade his conditional trainer's private licence to a public owner/trainer's licence.

He argued that it was difficult to find employment as a private trainer and he was unwilling to work as an assistant trainer.

The Administration opposed the request, noting that the licensee was currently under suspension for a positive drug test.

The Panel denied the request, finding that economic hardship is not a sufficient reason for re-licensing and that the request bordered on frivolous given his current suspension.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a ruling suspending him for two years followed by two years of probation for committing an act of cruelty to a horse.

The horse was found lame with a horseshoe nail driven deep into its hoof, ultimately requiring euthanasia.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed circumstantial evidence, including the appellant's motive, opportunity, and expertise as a blacksmith, as well as his prior harassment of the horse's owner.

Applying the balance of probabilities standard, the panel concluded the appellant was responsible for the injury and denied the appeal.

Standardbred driver Jason Brewer appealed a 3-day suspension for causing interference in the stretch during a race at Woodbine Racetrack, in violation of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard testimony from the drivers involved and reviewed the race tape.

The Commission found that the appellant did get into another driver's wheel and could have waited before moving.

The appeal was dismissed and the 3-day suspension was upheld.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a ruling that fined him $200 and suspended him for three days for excessive use of the whip during a race, in violation of Rule 22.23.01(b) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

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

The Commission noted that a lack of knowledge of the rules cannot be used as a defence, as it is the participant's responsibility to be aware of all racing rules.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a Judges Ruling that fined him $200 and suspended him for 3 days for allegedly using his whip from outside the confines of the race bike.

After reviewing the evidence and tapes, the Ontario Racing Commission found that the driver was inside the confines of the race bike, although close to going over.

The appeal was allowed.

Great Canadian Gaming Corporation (GCGC) appealed the terms and conditions of its racetrack licences for Flamboro Downs and Georgian Downs, which required cooperation with financial examinations of GCGC and its associated companies.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the Director has the jurisdiction to impose such conditions under the Racing Commission Act.

The panel held that full financial disclosure of the parent company is necessary to understand the operations of the subsidiaries and to properly discharge the Director's regulatory duties.

The licensee appealed the denial of a stay of rulings that fined him $5,000, suspended him for one year, suspended several of his horses, and held purse monies pending a court injunction.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel dismissed the appeal and denied the stay, citing the seriousness of the conduct, the licensee's prior probation for anger management, and the negative public perception of granting a stay.

The appellants, Michael Manders and Kelly Lester, appealed Notices of Proposed Orders to revoke their licenses for failing to disclose criminal records and an incident involving another licensee on their applications.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed Manders' appeal but varied the penalty to a one-year suspension with conditions upon reapplication.

Lester's appeal was dismissed, and her license was revoked.

The appellants were also ordered to pay $1,000 in costs thrown away for failing to appear at a previous hearing.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a ruling that fined her $500 and suspended her for three days for violating the urging rules by raising her hand above her shoulder while striking her mount.

At the hearing, the Administration agreed to withdraw the penalty in light of a recently completed review of the urging rules and subsequent recommendations of the ORC Committee of Inquiry.

The panel ordered the penalty withdrawn.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a ruling that fined him $300 and suspended him for one racing day for raising his hand above his head while urging his mount.

Given a recently completed review of the urging rules and subsequent recommendations of the ORC Committee of Inquiry, the Administration did not dispute the appeal.

The Panel ordered that the penalty be withdrawn.

The licensee appealed a ruling that fined him $300 and suspended him for one day for excessive use of his crop during a thoroughbred race.

At the hearing, the licensee's agent advised that the licensee wished to withdraw his appeal and serve his penalty.

The Administration recommended that the appeal be withdrawn without a cost penalty due to a recently completed review of the urging rules.

The Panel agreed and allowed the withdrawal without costs.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a ruling that fined him $500 and suspended him for three racing days for excessive urging (using the riding crop more than three times in succession) during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the video evidence clearly showed five successive hits without giving the horse time to respond, in violation of the rules.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a ruling that fined him $300 and suspended him for one racing day for raising his hand above his head while urging his mount, in violation of the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing.

Given a recent review of the urging rules and recommendations by the ORC Committee of Inquiry, the Administration did not dispute the appeal.

The Panel ordered that the penalty be withdrawn.

The licensee appealed a $300 fine and 5-day driving suspension for a rule violation involving improper urging of a horse.

At the hearing, the licensee requested to withdraw his appeal.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the request and directed the licensee to establish the suspension days to be served.

The appellants, a driver and a trainer, appealed a 3-day driving suspension imposed for causing interference during a horse race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the film evidence and heard testimony from the judges and the driver who suffered the interference.

The Commission found that the appellant crossed over in front of the other driver, causing the horse to break stride, and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a 3-day driving suspension imposed by the Judges for violating SB Rule 22.05.01(a) by causing interference to another horse during a race at Kawartha Downs.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard testimony from the judge, starter, and another driver, and reviewed the race video.

The Commission found that the appellant's horse clipped the legs of another horse, causing it to break stride.

The appeal was denied and the 3-day suspension was upheld.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed the Judges' decision regarding the non-placing of a horse in a race at Woodbine Racetrack.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard testimony from the Judges and drivers, and reviewed video evidence.

The Commission found that the evidence supported the Judges' original decision and dismissed the appeal.

The licensee appealed a condition of a stay of his suspension for cruelty to a horse, which prohibited him from attending the grounds of Rideau Carleton Raceway without permission of the Judges.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the condition was reasonable and that the licensee had not demonstrated that he had been unreasonably refused permission to attend the grounds for specific purposes.

The licensee, a standardbred owner/trainer, failed to present himself to provide a sample for random drug and alcohol testing, resulting in a suspension.

At the reinstatement hearing, the Ontario Racing Commission emphasized the seriousness of failing to report for random testing.

The Commission ordered the licensee to pay a $500 fine, serve a suspension until February 20, 2011, and enter into a one-year post-violation agreement.