Non Raceday Inquiry HRNZ v R J Dunn – Decision dated 14 May 2011
ID: JCA15571
Decision:
Information No. 69112, filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, against Licensed Public Trainer, Mr R J Dunn, alleged a breach of Rule 865 (2) in that Mr Dunn, as the trainer of CULLEN SPEED, an acceptor for Race 4, Awapuni Motor Hotel Mobile Pace, “failed to advise that this horse would not be racing with half blinds”.
The information was filed with the Registrar at 10.43pm on racenight, 17 March 2011, and was subsequently served on Mr Dunn at the meeting of Reefton Trotting Club at Addington Raceway, Christchurch, on 15 April 2011. The information was heard at the meeting of New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club at Addington Raceway on Saturday, 14 May 2011.
Mr J R Dunn, Licensed Open Horseman, was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated, firstly, that he was representing Mr Dunn and, secondly, that Mr Dunn did not admit the breach.
Rule 865 provides as follows:
(1) The trainer or person in control of a horse shall give notice, in the manner prescribed in the Approved Gear Regulations, of the notifiable gear to be worn by a horse in a totalisator race no later than the official deadline for the notification of drivers at the race meeting in which a horse is entered.
(1) The trainer or person in control of a horse shall give notice, in the manner prescribed in the Approved Gear Regulations, of the notifiable gear to be worn by a horse in a totalisator race no later than the official deadline for the notification of drivers at the race meeting in which a horse is entered.
(2) Every horse entered in a totalisator race shall be presented in the assembly area prior to the race in the same notifiable gear as that notified under sub-rule (1).
SUBMISSIONS:
Mr Renault said that, prior to CULLEN SPEED racing in Race 1 at the meeting of Ashburton TC on 27 February 2011, a gear change for the horse had been notified from pull down blinds to full blinds. The horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds, and not full blinds, but this was not picked up by the Stewards on the day and, therefore, Mr Dunn was not charged.
Mr Renault said that, prior to CULLEN SPEED racing in Race 1 at the meeting of Ashburton TC on 27 February 2011, a gear change for the horse had been notified from pull down blinds to full blinds. The horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds, and not full blinds, but this was not picked up by the Stewards on the day and, therefore, Mr Dunn was not charged.
At the meeting of Manawatu HRC on 17 March, the horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds which differed from the notified gear of full blinds.
Mr Dunn was not present at that meeting but, when spoken to by telephone, he said that the horse had never worn full blinds and that the horse had worn the same gear in which it had raced at Ashburton. Mr Renault submitted that the Rule was clear and that it was not acceptable to present a horse again to race in gear that had not been notified. It was Mr Dunn’s responsibility as trainer to ensure that the horse was presented in the gear as notified, notwithstanding that one of his staff may have made an error in notifying incorrect gear.
Mr John Dunn said that, prior to the horse’s Ashburton start, they had wished to change the gear on CULLEN SPEED. He had asked his cousin, Charlotte Hunter, who worked for Mr Dunn senior as a stablehand and who also worked for Harness Racing New Zealand, to enquire what a galloping hood had to be notified as. Mr Dunn asked her to notify the change of gear to a galloping hood/half blinds and, according to him, she was adamant that she had done so. The horse then raced at Ashburton and the error was not picked up. They were, therefore, not aware of the situation until the horse raced at Manawatu.
Mr Dunn said that the stable never raced horses in full blinds. Full blinds had been incorrectly entered with Harness Racing New Zealand.
Mr Renault said that he has spoken to Miss Hunter and she had said that she was unable to explain what had happened.
REASONS FOR DECISION:
In this case, it was not disputed that full blinds had been notified for the horse CULLEN SPEED, trained by Mr Dunn, at some stage prior to the Ashburton meeting on 27 February. Neither was it disputed that the horse raced at the Ashburton meeting and again at Manawatu on 17 March in half blinds and not the notified full blinds.
In this case, it was not disputed that full blinds had been notified for the horse CULLEN SPEED, trained by Mr Dunn, at some stage prior to the Ashburton meeting on 27 February. Neither was it disputed that the horse raced at the Ashburton meeting and again at Manawatu on 17 March in half blinds and not the notified full blinds.
The Committee accepts that a genuine error was made, the most likely explanation being that stablehand, Miss Hunter, had incorrectly entered full blinds instead of half blinds.
There is a strict obligation on a trainer to ensure that the correct gear for a horse is notified but, in the present case, Mr Dunn had taken all possible steps to notify a change from full blinds to half blinds for CULLEN SPEED. It appears that a genuine mistake was made in that the wrong gear was notified by an employee. Mr Dunn could not be expected to have known about the mistake.
However, ultimate responsibility for the breach rests with Mr Dunn.
Penalty:
The Committee finds the charge proved. However, it is satisfied that, because of the rather unique circumstances of the case, Mr Dunn should not be required to pay a fine for the breach. Therefore, no penalty is imposed on Mr Dunn.
Furthermore, by way of a direction to Stewards, the Committee wishes to record that this charge should not be deemed a “breach” for the purposes of Rule 1105A (1) (b) and Rule 1105A (2) and (3) (c).
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 14/04/2011
Publish Date: 14/04/2011
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: b59366466e363ed4153e87ab9843ecc8
informantnumber: 69112
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 14/04/2011
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry HRNZ v R J Dunn - Decision dated 14 May 2011
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
Information No. 69112, filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, against Licensed Public Trainer, Mr R J Dunn, alleged a breach of Rule 865 (2) in that Mr Dunn, as the trainer of CULLEN SPEED, an acceptor for Race 4, Awapuni Motor Hotel Mobile Pace, “failed to advise that this horse would not be racing with half blinds”.
The information was filed with the Registrar at 10.43pm on racenight, 17 March 2011, and was subsequently served on Mr Dunn at the meeting of Reefton Trotting Club at Addington Raceway, Christchurch, on 15 April 2011. The information was heard at the meeting of New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club at Addington Raceway on Saturday, 14 May 2011.
Mr J R Dunn, Licensed Open Horseman, was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated, firstly, that he was representing Mr Dunn and, secondly, that Mr Dunn did not admit the breach.
Rule 865 provides as follows:
(1) The trainer or person in control of a horse shall give notice, in the manner prescribed in the Approved Gear Regulations, of the notifiable gear to be worn by a horse in a totalisator race no later than the official deadline for the notification of drivers at the race meeting in which a horse is entered.
(1) The trainer or person in control of a horse shall give notice, in the manner prescribed in the Approved Gear Regulations, of the notifiable gear to be worn by a horse in a totalisator race no later than the official deadline for the notification of drivers at the race meeting in which a horse is entered.
(2) Every horse entered in a totalisator race shall be presented in the assembly area prior to the race in the same notifiable gear as that notified under sub-rule (1).
SUBMISSIONS:
Mr Renault said that, prior to CULLEN SPEED racing in Race 1 at the meeting of Ashburton TC on 27 February 2011, a gear change for the horse had been notified from pull down blinds to full blinds. The horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds, and not full blinds, but this was not picked up by the Stewards on the day and, therefore, Mr Dunn was not charged.
Mr Renault said that, prior to CULLEN SPEED racing in Race 1 at the meeting of Ashburton TC on 27 February 2011, a gear change for the horse had been notified from pull down blinds to full blinds. The horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds, and not full blinds, but this was not picked up by the Stewards on the day and, therefore, Mr Dunn was not charged.
At the meeting of Manawatu HRC on 17 March, the horse was presented in a galloping hood/half blinds which differed from the notified gear of full blinds.
Mr Dunn was not present at that meeting but, when spoken to by telephone, he said that the horse had never worn full blinds and that the horse had worn the same gear in which it had raced at Ashburton. Mr Renault submitted that the Rule was clear and that it was not acceptable to present a horse again to race in gear that had not been notified. It was Mr Dunn’s responsibility as trainer to ensure that the horse was presented in the gear as notified, notwithstanding that one of his staff may have made an error in notifying incorrect gear.
Mr John Dunn said that, prior to the horse’s Ashburton start, they had wished to change the gear on CULLEN SPEED. He had asked his cousin, Charlotte Hunter, who worked for Mr Dunn senior as a stablehand and who also worked for Harness Racing New Zealand, to enquire what a galloping hood had to be notified as. Mr Dunn asked her to notify the change of gear to a galloping hood/half blinds and, according to him, she was adamant that she had done so. The horse then raced at Ashburton and the error was not picked up. They were, therefore, not aware of the situation until the horse raced at Manawatu.
Mr Dunn said that the stable never raced horses in full blinds. Full blinds had been incorrectly entered with Harness Racing New Zealand.
Mr Renault said that he has spoken to Miss Hunter and she had said that she was unable to explain what had happened.
REASONS FOR DECISION:
In this case, it was not disputed that full blinds had been notified for the horse CULLEN SPEED, trained by Mr Dunn, at some stage prior to the Ashburton meeting on 27 February. Neither was it disputed that the horse raced at the Ashburton meeting and again at Manawatu on 17 March in half blinds and not the notified full blinds.
In this case, it was not disputed that full blinds had been notified for the horse CULLEN SPEED, trained by Mr Dunn, at some stage prior to the Ashburton meeting on 27 February. Neither was it disputed that the horse raced at the Ashburton meeting and again at Manawatu on 17 March in half blinds and not the notified full blinds.
The Committee accepts that a genuine error was made, the most likely explanation being that stablehand, Miss Hunter, had incorrectly entered full blinds instead of half blinds.
There is a strict obligation on a trainer to ensure that the correct gear for a horse is notified but, in the present case, Mr Dunn had taken all possible steps to notify a change from full blinds to half blinds for CULLEN SPEED. It appears that a genuine mistake was made in that the wrong gear was notified by an employee. Mr Dunn could not be expected to have known about the mistake.
However, ultimate responsibility for the breach rests with Mr Dunn.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
The Committee finds the charge proved. However, it is satisfied that, because of the rather unique circumstances of the case, Mr Dunn should not be required to pay a fine for the breach. Therefore, no penalty is imposed on Mr Dunn.
Furthermore, by way of a direction to Stewards, the Committee wishes to record that this charge should not be deemed a “breach” for the purposes of Rule 1105A (1) (b) and Rule 1105A (2) and (3) (c).
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules: 865(2)
Informant: Mr S Renault - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent:
Respondent: Mr R J Dunn - Licensed Trainer
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: