Ontario Racing Commission

The appellant, a horse trainer, appealed a 5-year suspension and $20,000 fine imposed after two of his horses tested positive for aminorex.

The Ontario Racing Commission Panel found that while the absolute liability rule for positive tests prevailed, the appellant had exercised due diligence and no causal link or source for the aminorex could be established.

Consequently, the Panel allowed the motion to vary the penalty, setting aside the suspension and eliminating the fine in its entirety, while placing the appellant on probation for six months to permit ongoing investigations and out-of-competition testing.

The appellants appealed a ruling that issued a three-day driving suspension and placed their horse behind another due to an interference break during a standardbred race.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that the driver made a split-second decision to move out, causing interference that changed the outcome of the race.

The original placing and three-day suspension were upheld.

The appellants, a trainer and a veterinarian, appealed suspensions and fines imposed after a horse tested positive for mepivacaine.

The panel found that the appellants had followed the Canadian Pari-Mutuel Association guidelines and exercised an exemplary standard of care.

The panel allowed the appeals, eliminated the suspensions and fines, and restored the horse's original placing in the race.

The appellant, a licensed jockey, appealed a ruling that found he violated several Rules of Thoroughbred Racing and imposed a three-day suspension.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the appellant's riding caused interference with another horse near the wire, as he hit his horse left-handed and failed to control it, causing it to move out.

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

Michelle Redel appealed a Notice of Proposed Order refusing to renew her racing licence due to past criminal charges, including animal cruelty and assault.

The parties reached an Agreed Statement of Facts and Joint Submission for Disposition.

Redel withdrew her appeal and licence application, agreeing not to reapply until June 2016 and to comply with her probation orders.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the joint submission.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a $200 fine for violating Rule 22.03(j)(vii) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing by failing to bring his horse into position at the starting gate.

The appellant argued that he was concerned about pushing the three-year-old horse too much and forcing a break.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that the horse was too far off the gate and that public perception required enforcing the rule.

The fine was upheld.

The appellant appealed a ruling charging her with a violation of Rule 17.17 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing for inappropriately scratching a horse.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that the horse had been properly entered and classified, and that scratching the horse was not appropriate despite another racing opportunity being available.

The fine was upheld, but no additional costs were ordered.

Following a Divisional Court decision that quashed the original penalty for a lasix overage, the matter was referred back to the Ontario Racing Commission for redetermination.

The parties presented a joint submission for a $300 fine, noting that the Divisional Court found lasix overages were not covered by the Commission's Penalty Guidelines but rather the Uniform Classification Guidelines.

The Panel accepted the joint submission and imposed the $300 fine.

The appellant appealed a ruling for a violation of Rule 22.09 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing, alleging his horse caused interference during a race at Mohawk Raceway.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel reviewed the video evidence and testimony, finding that the appellant's horse came out too tight and did not leave enough clearance, causing another horse to break stride.

The appeal was denied and the judges' original decision was upheld.

The appellant, a jockey, appealed a ruling regarding his licence.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted a Joint Submission for Disposition, ordering the appellant to pay an $1,800 fine and execute a five-year Extended Post-Violation Agreement with a zero-tolerance policy for alcohol and drugs as conditions precedent to the reinstatement of his jockey licence.

The agreement included requirements for random testing and substance abuse counselling.

The appellant jockey appealed a ruling by the stewards finding him guilty of interference during a thoroughbred race.

The Ontario Racing Commission reviewed the race tape and heard evidence from the stewards and the jockey who claimed foul.

The Commission found that the preponderance of evidence supported a finding of interference and upheld the stewards' penalty, denying the appeal.

The appellant jockey appealed a $200 penalty for failing to lodge an objection when fouled during a thoroughbred race.

The Ontario Racing Commission upheld the finding of a rule violation, noting the positive obligation to claim foul when interference occurs.

However, finding the appellant credible in his assertion that he was unaware of the interference, the Commission varied the penalty by staying the $200 fine for six months, provided no similar infractions occur.

The appellant appealed a judges' ruling that found his horse passed two consecutive pylons and gained an unfair advantage during a race.

In accordance with Rule 22.09 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing, the horse had finished second but was placed sixth.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, upholding the unanimous findings of the judges after reviewing the race tapes.

The appellant, a horse trainer, appealed a decision denying her request for a stay of a suspension following a positive test for methamphetamine in a horse.

The panel applied the three-part test for granting a stay.

Finding that the small amount of methamphetamine found would not have enhanced the horse's performance and that the appellant had no prior offences, the panel granted a two-month stay with conditions to allow for further testing of samples.

The appellants appealed against rulings for a violation of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The panel found that the driver left the course by going inside a pylon, gaining an unfair advantage during a race.

The appeal was denied, the horse was moved from a second-place finish to a seventh-place finish, and the driver was fined $100.

The appellant appealed a decision by horse racing Judges denying trainer transfer applications for six racehorses.

The Judges had denied the transfers under Rule 26.08 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing, citing a positive test and subsequent suspension of the original trainer.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal, finding that the Judges lacked the authority to deny the transfers under Rule 26.08 because the original trainer was not actually suspended at the time the horses were under his care or trained by him.

The denials were set aside and the transfers approved.

The appellant appealed a decision by horse racing Judges denying trainer transfer applications for six racehorses.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal, finding that the Judges lacked the authority under Rule 26.08 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing to deny the applications.

The Commission held that the two conditions precedent for denying a transfer—that the trainer must be suspended and the horse must be trained by him or under his care—did not co-exist at the same time.

The appellant appealed a ruling that placed his horse, Bad Fox, second in a race at Woodbine Racetrack.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that while the appeal was not frivolous and the race was very tight, the judges' original determination should be upheld.

The appeal was denied.

The appellant, a licensed owner/driver/trainer, appealed a ruling that suspended his horse for 90 days after it tested positive for Ractopamine.

The parties presented an Agreed Statement of Facts and a joint recommendation to stay the suspension.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the joint recommendation and granted the stay on the condition that the horse provides a clear/negative sample prior to racing and does not test positive for any prohibited drug during the stayed period.

The appellant requested a hearing regarding the Director's Notice of Proposed Order to Refuse to Renew her licence.

At the hearing, the appellant's representative requested an adjournment to secure witnesses and prepare a factum.

The Commission granted the adjournment, marking the new date peremptory on the appellant, and set a schedule for the exchange of disclosure and responding materials.