Amberley TC – 9 January 2005 –
ID: JCA18358
Hearing Type (Code):
harness-racing
Decision: --
Following the running of Races 2 and 3 an information was laid by Stipendiary Steward Mrs Williams against Mr P. McClelland, Open Horseman, alleging a breach of Rule 847(1), in that he failed to wear a safety vest.
| -- DECISION AND REASONS: --Following the running of Races 2 and 3 an information was laid by Stipendiary Steward Mrs Williams against Mr P. McClelland, Open Horseman, alleging a breach of Rule 847(1), in that he failed to wear a safety vest. ------Mr McClelland had indicated that he admitted these breaches of the rule and he --confirmed this at the hearing. ------The rule provides that no horseman shall be checked out unless he wears safety --gear which complies with the requirements of the Safety Gear Regulations made by the Executive. --Mrs Williams gave evidence that prior to Race 3 it was noticed that Mr McClelland was not wearing a safety vest. He was required to put the vest on before the race started. It was also established the Mr McClelland had not worn a safety vest in the previous race, Mr McClelland admitting that this was the case. --Mr McClelland did not dispute the facts as set out by Mrs Williams. He explained that he had been very busy at the time, but did not seek to excuse his actions. --PENALTY: Mrs Williams made submissions that a fine of $200-00 for the breach of the rule in Race 2 would be appropriate, and a fine of $100-00 for the breach in Race 3. The fine for the second breach was reduced because Mr McClelland did wear a vest after the breach was discovered. Mrs Williams emphasised that this was a safety issue, and that failure to wear a safety vest could have had severe consequences if there had been an accident. --Mr McClelland said that the recommended fines were, he thought, excessive. --Having heard the submissions on penalty I advised Mr McClelland that I believed that the fines recommended were appropriate, but having not encountered a breach of this nature before I would have a look at the previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule. --After having looked at previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule I was satisfied that the penalties were appropriate. Mr McClelland was therefore fined $200-00 for the breach of the Rule in Race 2, and a further $100-00 for the breach of the Rule in Race 3. --
|
| -- |
Decision Date: 09/01/2005
Publish Date: 09/01/2005
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: 0e096a6fe75d670d5257fa8f58eaad6b
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype: harness-racing
startdate: 09/01/2005
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: no date provided
hearing_title: Amberley TC - 9 January 2005 -
charge:
facts:
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
--Following the running of Races 2 and 3 an information was laid by Stipendiary Steward Mrs Williams against Mr P. McClelland, Open Horseman, alleging a breach of Rule 847(1), in that he failed to wear a safety vest.
| -- DECISION AND REASONS: --Following the running of Races 2 and 3 an information was laid by Stipendiary Steward Mrs Williams against Mr P. McClelland, Open Horseman, alleging a breach of Rule 847(1), in that he failed to wear a safety vest. ------Mr McClelland had indicated that he admitted these breaches of the rule and he --confirmed this at the hearing. ------The rule provides that no horseman shall be checked out unless he wears safety --gear which complies with the requirements of the Safety Gear Regulations made by the Executive. --Mrs Williams gave evidence that prior to Race 3 it was noticed that Mr McClelland was not wearing a safety vest. He was required to put the vest on before the race started. It was also established the Mr McClelland had not worn a safety vest in the previous race, Mr McClelland admitting that this was the case. --Mr McClelland did not dispute the facts as set out by Mrs Williams. He explained that he had been very busy at the time, but did not seek to excuse his actions. --PENALTY: Mrs Williams made submissions that a fine of $200-00 for the breach of the rule in Race 2 would be appropriate, and a fine of $100-00 for the breach in Race 3. The fine for the second breach was reduced because Mr McClelland did wear a vest after the breach was discovered. Mrs Williams emphasised that this was a safety issue, and that failure to wear a safety vest could have had severe consequences if there had been an accident.--Mr McClelland said that the recommended fines were, he thought, excessive. --Having heard the submissions on penalty I advised Mr McClelland that I believed that the fines recommended were appropriate, but having not encountered a breach of this nature before I would have a look at the previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule. --After having looked at previous penalties imposed for a breach of this rule I was satisfied that the penalties were appropriate. Mr McClelland was therefore fined $200-00 for the breach of the Rule in Race 2, and a further $100-00 for the breach of the Rule in Race 3. --
|
| -- |
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Old Hearing
Rules: 847.1
Informant:
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid:
race_expapproval:
racecancelled:
race_noreport:
race_emailed1:
race_emailed2:
race_title:
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid:
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport:
waitingforpublication:
meet_emailed1:
meet_emailed2:
meetdate: no date provided
meet_title:
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation:
meet_racingtype:
meet_chair:
meet_pm1:
meet_pm2:
name: