Ontario Racing Commission

The appellant jockey appealed a Stewards' ruling that denied his claim of foul against two other jockeys during a Quarter Horse race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the testimony and race films, concluding that the contact between the horses near the start of the race was incidental and did not warrant a placing.

The appeal was denied, and the panel reminded licensees of their obligation to be forthright when testifying.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a three-day riding suspension imposed by the Stewards for causing interference during a race.

The appellant admitted to causing the interference but appealed the penalty.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding no mitigating factors and upholding the three-day suspension.

Additionally, the appellant was fined $100 for arriving 20 minutes late to the appeal hearing without a valid reason.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a Judges' Ruling imposing a $300 fine and a five-day driving suspension for excessive urging of a horse.

At the hearing, the appellant agreed to drop his appeal in exchange for being allowed to serve his penalty under the procedures that existed prior to June 14, 2010.

The Panel upheld the original ruling and the appellant agreed to serve the suspension on the specified dates.

The appellant appealed a three-day driving suspension for a racing violation.

On the date of the hearing, the appellant did not attend, citing health reasons.

The Ontario Racing Commission granted an adjournment to August 16, 2010, conditional upon the receipt of satisfactory medical documentation by the end of the day.

The licensee appealed a three-day driving suspension for causing interference during a standardbred race.

At the hearing, the licensee pleaded guilty to the charge and accepted the Chair's offer to withdraw the appeal without further penalty.

The three-day driving suspension was imposed.

The appellant jockey appealed a Stewards' ruling that imposed a $300 fine and a one-day riding suspension for violating the Rules of Thoroughbred Racing by striking another horse in the head with his whip during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that video evidence and live observations by the Stewards supported the conclusion that the appellant's crop made contact with the other horse.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a three-day driving suspension for causing interference during a race.

The appellant did not attend the scheduled hearing, citing medical reasons.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel granted a conditional adjournment to August 16, 2010, provided the appellant submitted supporting medical documentation by the end of the day.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a Judges' ruling that declined to place a horse that went on a break during a race.

The appellant argued the horse did not continuously lose ground as required by the breaking rules.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, preferring the testimony of the Judge and the driver that the horse did lose ground, albeit marginally, and was not lapped on at the finish.

The licensee, a standardbred driver/trainer/owner, applied for reinstatement of his license after his eighth positive test for cocaine and subsequent violations of his probation and post-violation agreements.

The Ontario Racing Commission granted the application for reinstatement subject to strict conditions, including a two-year probation period, random drug testing, mandatory participation in a rehabilitation program, and an automatic five-year suspension for any future positive tests.

Lascelles DaCosta appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to revoke his standardbred racing licence after an investigation revealed he failed to disclose his criminal record and traffic violations on his application.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that DaCosta violated the rules by failing to honestly complete his application.

The appeal was denied, but the penalty was varied to a 12-month suspension (with 10 months stayed) and a $3,000 fine, considering mitigating factors such as his recent clean record and financial responsibility in racing.

Sudbury Downs appealed a decision of the Director of the Ontario Racing Commission refusing to approve the use of purse funds to pay for stall expense credits to trainers stabling at the track.

The track argued the Director breached procedural fairness and legitimate expectations, given past approvals.

The Commission confirmed the Director's decision that the proposed use of purse funds was improper, as it benefited only a limited class of starters and did not meet the threshold of benefiting all or a sizeable proportion of horse people.

However, the Commission varied the decision to allow the stall expense credit for the 2010 racing season only, in recognition of the unique circumstances and to allow time to negotiate contractual remedies for 2011.

The licensee, a thoroughbred trainer, appealed a Stewards' ruling that suspended her for one year and fined her $5,000 after her horse tested positive for caffeine, a Class II drug.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found no evidence that the caffeine came from an external contaminant or previous exposure to coffee.

However, considering the licensee's good record and lack of intent to gain an unfair advantage, the panel allowed the appeal in part, reducing the suspension to six months and the fine to $2,500.

The licensee, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed a $200 fine imposed by the Stewards for excessive use of the crop during a race.

The Stewards found the licensee used the crop an unreasonable number of times.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that the Stewards properly exercised their discretion in determining the quantity of crop use was unreasonable, and upheld the $200 fine.

The appellant, a thoroughbred jockey, appealed two Stewards' rulings that imposed fines and riding suspensions for urging violations.

At the hearing, the parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the Joint Submission, ordering the appellant to pay $800 in outstanding fines, staying the riding suspensions, and placing the appellant on probation for approximately one year with conditions regarding future urging violations.

The appellants, the driver and trainer/owner of the standardbred horse Newport Volo, appealed a track judges' ruling that placed the horse from second to third for failing to continuously lose ground when off stride during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the horse broke from a trot to a pace near the finish line and did not lose ground as strictly required by Rule 22.27(c) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The remnant of the second-place purse monies was ordered distributed to the owner of the third-place horse.

The licensee, a standardbred owner/trainer/driver, appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to suspend his licence for purchasing unlabelled and unprescribed therapeutic substances from unauthorized distributors.

Following a review of the evidence and a joint submission on penalty, the Ontario Racing Commission rescinded the proposed suspension.

The panel ordered a $1,000 fine and a one-year probation period, during which any further violation would trigger an immediate suspension.

The applicant, an apprentice jockey, was suspended after multiple positive tests for marijuana and a subsequent refusal to take a return-to-duty test.

After producing a negative test nearly two years later, he applied for a reinstatement hearing.

The Ontario Racing Commission granted the application, allowing him to apply for re-licensing subject to entering a post-violation agreement and enrolling in an approved substance abuse program for 12 months.

The appellants, a horse owner and a jockey, appealed the Stewards' rulings disqualifying their horse from first place and suspending the jockey for three days for alleged interference during a race.

The Ontario Racing Commission heard the appeal de novo.

Based on new video evidence and expert testimony, the Panel found that the jockey did not interfere with, intimidate, or impede any other horse, but merely moved into unoccupied space.

The Panel granted both appeals and restored the original order of finish.

The appellant, a thoroughbred trainer, appealed a decision by the Stewards to disqualify his horse for interference during a race.

The Stewards had placed the horse tenth after finding it interfered with another horse during the stretch run.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the video evidence and testimony, concluding that there was insufficient room for the appellant's horse to pass, resulting in interference.

The appeal was denied and the Stewards' decision was upheld.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed a Stewards' ruling that suspended him for 5 years and fined him $2,000 for failing to ensure proper care for horses.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that the appellant clearly violated the rules by failing to provide basic necessities of care, resulting in extreme and inhumane conditions for the horses.

The panel dismissed the appeal regarding the violations but varied the penalty, staying a portion of the suspension to allow the appellant to be eligible for a groom or hot walker's licence after a short full suspension, while maintaining the 5-year suspension for an owner or trainer's licence.