Auckland RC 3 March 2012 – R 9 (request for a ruling)
ID: JCA13687
Code:
Thoroughbred
Meet Title:
Auckland RC - 3 March 2012
Meet Chair:
RSeabrook
Meet Committee Member 1:
ADooley
Race Date:
2012/03/03
Race Number:
R 9
Decision:
The committee carefully considered all submissions as presented. We find this to be a classic example of a break down in communication between the 2 parties. After taking all submissions into account and because of the conflicting evidence between the 2 parties this committee cannot rule that Mr Cooksley had a confirmed engagement to ride GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby.
Facts:
Prior to race 9 an information was filed pursuant to rule 330 (2). The informant Mr G Cooksley requested a ruling concerning a riding engagement for GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Cooksley told the committee he believed he had a firm engagement for GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby. This was because the horse's owner Mr O'Neill had phoned him asking him if he was interested in riding his horse in the Derby. Mr O'Neill asked him to look at the videos of the horse's previous races. Mr Cooksley said that following this Mr O'Neill asked him if he was happy to take the ride which he agreed to do.
Mr O'Neill in his submissions said that while concurring with the majority of Mr Cooksley's submissions told the committee he had said to Mr Cooksley he would get back to him to confirm the ride after their last conversation. He said he did not do this because he discovered Mr Shailer had engaged Mr Harris for the Derby ride.
Mr Shailer said that on 27 February he asked Mr N Harris to gallop the horse. At that stage he was not nominated for the Derby but later that day was asked by the owners to pay the late entry fee and book Mr N Harris for the ride. Mr Shailer told the committee he was unaware of the communication between Mr Cooksley and GUESS WHAT'S owner Mr O'Neill. He said obviously he would not have booked Mr Harris if he had thought Mr Cooksley had been engaged.
Reasons for Decision:
We find this to be a classic example of a break down in communication between the 2 parties.
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 583ce740d93ef6dbcff01855b3ad21b9
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 28/02/2012
hearing_title: Auckland RC 3 March 2012 - R 9 (request for a ruling)
charge:
facts:
Prior to race 9 an information was filed pursuant to rule 330 (2). The informant Mr G Cooksley requested a ruling concerning a riding engagement for GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Cooksley told the committee he believed he had a firm engagement for GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby. This was because the horse's owner Mr O'Neill had phoned him asking him if he was interested in riding his horse in the Derby. Mr O'Neill asked him to look at the videos of the horse's previous races. Mr Cooksley said that following this Mr O'Neill asked him if he was happy to take the ride which he agreed to do.
Mr O'Neill in his submissions said that while concurring with the majority of Mr Cooksley's submissions told the committee he had said to Mr Cooksley he would get back to him to confirm the ride after their last conversation. He said he did not do this because he discovered Mr Shailer had engaged Mr Harris for the Derby ride.
Mr Shailer said that on 27 February he asked Mr N Harris to gallop the horse. At that stage he was not nominated for the Derby but later that day was asked by the owners to pay the late entry fee and book Mr N Harris for the ride. Mr Shailer told the committee he was unaware of the communication between Mr Cooksley and GUESS WHAT'S owner Mr O'Neill. He said obviously he would not have booked Mr Harris if he had thought Mr Cooksley had been engaged.
reasonsfordecision:
We find this to be a classic example of a break down in communication between the 2 parties.
Decision:
The committee carefully considered all submissions as presented. We find this to be a classic example of a break down in communication between the 2 parties. After taking all submissions into account and because of the conflicting evidence between the 2 parties this committee cannot rule that Mr Cooksley had a confirmed engagement to ride GUESS WHAT in the Telecom NZ Derby.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Request Ruling
Rules: 330(2)
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr G Cooksley - Informant, Mr P Shailer - Respondent and Trainer of GUESS WHAT, Mr O'Neill - Owner of GUESS WHAT
Respondent:
StipendSteward: Mr C George
raceid: 6488ee013206846302566027f0253739
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R 9
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 52cccd5293cb7195df562c964ffd06e1
meet_expapproval: approved
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 03/03/2012
meet_title: Auckland RC - 3 March 2012
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km: [{"Comment": [], "MemberRole": "Chair ", "MemberID": "RSeabrook", "Member": "", "OtherExpenses": "0", "KMs": "310", "Total": "192.2", "kmprice": 192.19999999999999, "Approved": "on"}]
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: auckland-rc
meet_racingtype: thoroughbred-racing
meet_chair: RSeabrook
meet_pm1: ADooley
meet_pm2: none
name: Auckland RC