Canterbury JC – 7 September 2007 – Race 2, Race 5

hearingid: c8dccaa738a13edee41d5b1283a5ef5b

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 07/09/2007

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Canterbury JC - 7 September 2007 - Race 2, Race 5

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

Informations 7357 and 7366 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 302(5)(a) in that a non-registered person assisted trainer, P Harris, with the handling of "Montira" (Information 7357) and a non-registered person assisted trainer K Hughes with the handling of "Million Kisses" (Information 7366).

Informations 7357 and 7366 alleging a breach of the Rules of Racing, Rule 302(5)(a) in that a non-registered person assisted trainer, P Harris, with the handling of "Montira" (Information 7357) and a non-registered person assisted trainer K Hughes with the handling of "Million Kisses" (Information 7366).

Informant - Mr S Ching, Stipendiary Steward.

Mr PDJ Harris, Licensed Trainer, and Mr K Hughes, were charged by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S Ching, with a breach of Rule 302(5)(a) in that they each allowed a non-registered person to assist with the handling of horses.

As we were made aware that the fact situations were remarkably similar, it was agreed by all parties that the Informations could be heard together.

In Mr Hughes' case, he advised that he was approached by Assistant Stipendiary Steward Mr M Humphries, who informed him that he was aware of a non-licensed person leading the horse "Million Kisses" around in the stalls area and stated that it was a breach of the Rule. Mr Hughes advised the hearing that he did not think that it was particularly important, and did not realise that if the situation continued, that he would become the subject of a charge and a possible fine.

Mr Harris advised the hearing that he had allowed a non-registered person to lead the horse in a similar manner. It was then confirmed to the hearing that the persons involved with the leading of the horses were owners who had made requests independently of the two defendants to lead the horses in the tie-up area, then to the parade ring, and then finally out to the bird cage.

Both Mr Harris and Mr Hughes admitted the charges against them, which are therefore deemed to be proved.

There was considerable discussion with regard to the penalty that was to be imposed. Neither Mr Hughes or Mr Harris appreciated what was happening, and neither did they seem to be aware of the Rule, notwithstanding the reference to it in the August edition of the New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing monthly journal. It is noted that this Rule came into effect on 1 August 2007.

After giving due consideration to the fact situation, it seemed to this Committee that even though there was, in both case, a breach of the Rule, the impact of the breach was not great. It is noted that Rule 302(5)(a) seems to be aimed at the protection of the integrity of racing, and to ensure that public confidence is engendered. In particular, it is observed that in Rule 301(1)(c) that the New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing Board is charged with the duties of:

"Prohibiting undesirable persons from being employed in or about any stable or otherwise in connection with the training of horses."

In this case, there can be no doubt that the owners "assisted" in the care of the horses concerned in terms of Rule 302 (5)(a) and thus, they became temporary stable hands, but there did not seem to be any suggestion that the non-registered persons were "undesirable".

Mr Ching submitted that he had received a direction from the Chief Stipendiary Steward to recommend a fine of $50. It was observed to the hearing that it is the task of a Judicial Committee to determine, on the basis of all facts before it, the level of penalty to be imposed and that any recommendation from a Stipendiary Steward is just that, namely a recommendation. It is not and cannot be a binding direction on a Judicial Committee. It was noted also that the proposed fine had been agreed to by Mr Harris. This Committee makes it clear that penalties cannot be "pre arranged". Each case is to be carefully assessed on its merits or "demerits" as the case may be, by the Judicial Committee of the day, and penalties imposed accordingly.

It is this Committee's opinion that even though there had been a breach of the Rule, that it was minor in nature and that there was no evidence before the Committee of "undesirable persons" being employed by the trainers concerned. Both trainers confirmed that they were placed under some pressure by the owners of the horses in question to lead the horses around in the manner earlier described and both trainers confirmed that they had not turned their minds to the fact that a breach of the Rule was occurring.

Having considered all matters in relation to this case, this Committee was firmly of the view that the charge could be found proved, but in the circumstances, no penalty should be imposed.

------------

KG Hales

Chairman

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 302.5.a, 301.1.c

Informant:

JockeysandTrainer:

Otherperson:

PersonPresent:

Respondent:

StipendSteward:

raceid: 9021e79cbb67f507edd9f16db6baf085

race_expapproval:

racecancelled: 0

race_noreport: 0

race_emailed1: 0

race_emailed2: 0

race_title: Race 2

submittochair:

race_expappcomment:

race_km:

race_otherexp:

race_chair:

race_pm1:

race_pm2:

meetid: 8f51f5775aebe33d5c78db0eb02253fe

meet_expapproval:

meet_noreport: 0

waitingforpublication: 0

meet_emailed1: 0

meet_emailed2: 0

meetdate: 07/09/2007

meet_title: Canterbury JC - 7 September 2007

meet_expappcomment:

meet_km:

meet_otherexp:

tracklocation: canterbury-jc

meet_racingtype: harness-racing

meet_chair:

meet_pm1:

meet_pm2:

name: Canterbury JC