Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v G Vile – decision dated 7 February 2015
ID: JCA15736
Decision:
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
AND IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing
BETWEEN SIMON ANDREW IRVING (RIU INVESTIGATOR)
Informant
AND GARY VILE
Respondent
Judicial Committee: Mrs N Moffatt, Chair - Mr T Castles, Committee Member
Appearing: Mr Simon Irving (informant) – Mr G Vile (as the respondent)
Registrar: Mr L Tidmarsh
Venue: Awapuni Racecourse
Date of Hearing: 7 February 2015
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1] Mr Vile appeared before the Judicial Committee on the following charge:
Information Number A4163
THAT on the 5th January 2015 at Otaki, Gary Vile presented CASTLE VIEW, being the wrong horse, in Race 2 of the Otaki Maori Racing Club meeting.
[2] The rule reads as follows:
802 (1) A person commits a breach of these Rules who:
(a) acts in contravention of or fails to comply with any provision of these Rules or any Regulations made thereunder, or any policy, notice, direction, instruction, guideline, restriction, requirement or condition given, made or imposed under these Rules
803 (1) A person who, or body or other entity which, commits or is deemed to have committed a breach of these Rules or any of them for which a penalty is not provided elsewhere in these Rules shall be liable to:
(a) be disqualified for a period not exceeding 12 months; and/or
(b) be suspended from holding or obtaining a Licence for a period not exceeding 12 months. If a Licence is renewed during a term of suspension, then the suspension shall continue to apply to the renewed Licence; and/or
(c) a fine not exceeding $20,000.
[3] Mr Vile confirmed he understood the nature of the charge and that he admitted the breach. We therefore found the charge proved.
[4] Mr Irving produced a signed authority from the Racing Integrity Unit (RIU) to proceed with the charge against Mr Vile.
FACTS
[5] The respondent Gary VILE is a licenced trainer under the Rules of New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing Incorporated. He has been a trainer for approximately 30 years.
[6] At the Otaki-Maori Racing Club’s meeting on Monday 5th January 2015 the horse CASTLE VIEW was an acceptor for Race 2 on the programme. CASTLE VIEW was listed in all documentation (NZTR print-outs and the course race book) as being a 5yo brown mare (Castledale - Turtle View) trained by Mr VILE. The horse was on debut.
[7] During the routine brand inspection it was noted that the brands on the horse presented did not match those of the NZTR records.
[8] Stewards ordered the scratching of the horse and as Mr Vile was not present on course he was advised of the situation via telephone.
[9] When spoken to on the 12th January, Mr Vile stated that it was an honest mistake from his stables for which he accepted ultimate responsibility. He explained the full reasons to the Judicial Committee today.
[10] The mare, Turtle View, had two filly foals over two consecutive years. A foal return was completed for the first foal however the owner failed to complete a foal return for the full sister born one season later.
[11] The first foal, named Castle View, was not trained by Mr Vile and in fact did not ever race.
[12] The second foal was given to Mr Vile to train. Prior to this horse having its first race day start (at Otaki) Mr Vile asked one of his staff to register the now 4yo mare. The staff member did so using the regular NZTR online process.
[13] Unfortunately, due to the absence of a foaling return, this mare was registered in error as its older full sister. (The horse has since been registered as ISLAND VIEW.)
[14] Mr Vile further advised that Island View, then unnamed, was an acceptor at barrier jumpouts in May 2014. Her brands were noted on the day and forwarded to NZTR but for unknown reasons the mistake was not picked up.
[15] Mr Vile has been involved in the thoroughbred racing industry for more than 30 years. He has had no previous charges for presenting the wrong horse.
PENALTY SUBMISSIONS BY INFORMANT
[16] Mr Irving provided the Committee with one previous charge from January 2014. On that occasion a trainer (RIU v M Pitman) was fined the sum of $400 for a breach of the same rule.
[17] The Committee is familiar with two other cases, NZTR v P Harris and NZTR v J Lynds, these each received fines of $600 plus costs.
[18] Mr Vile said that he had been treated very fairly and asked the Committee to take into account the mitigating factors.
DECISION
[19] In coming to our decision we have carefully considered all of the submissions placed before us.
[20] Mr Vile has been a participant within the racing industry for more than 30 years, and he is very mindful of his obligations as a public trainer. He has taken full responsibility for the incorrect horse being presented at the races despite some events being out of his control.
[21] The committee notes Mr Vile’s admission of the breach and his co-operation with the investigation process.
[22] This breach differs from others in that Mr Vile did not confuse two individual horses within his stable. The error was an administrative one.
[23] The first mistake came when the owner failed to submit a foal return. This resulted in only one Castledale/Turtle View foal appearing on the NZTR data base. Further the error was not picked up when the brands were checked at barrier jump outs in May last year.
[24] Mr Vile, as the trainer, has the ultimate responsibility and, by his own admission, said he failed to manually check the brands of the horse involved.
[25] It was our opinion that an appropriate starting point for penalty was a $600 fine. We have taken into account the mitigating factors as outlined above and given Mr Vile credit for these.
PENALTY
[26] Accordingly Mr Vile is fined the sum of $500.
COSTS
[27] As this matter was heard on a race day there was no application for costs.
Nicki Moffatt Tom Castles
Chair Committee Member
Appeal Decision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
Decision Date: 11/02/2015
Publish Date: 11/02/2015
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: c98c0364aa6bbc811d88d43745d85d33
informantnumber:
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 11/02/2015
hearing_title: Non Raceday Inquiry RIU v G Vile - decision dated 7 February 2015
charge:
facts:
appealdecision: NO LINKED APPEAL DECISION
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
reasonsfordecision:
Decision:
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003
AND IN THE MATTER of the New Zealand Rules of Racing
BETWEEN SIMON ANDREW IRVING (RIU INVESTIGATOR)
Informant
AND GARY VILE
Respondent
Judicial Committee: Mrs N Moffatt, Chair - Mr T Castles, Committee Member
Appearing: Mr Simon Irving (informant) – Mr G Vile (as the respondent)
Registrar: Mr L Tidmarsh
Venue: Awapuni Racecourse
Date of Hearing: 7 February 2015
DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
[1] Mr Vile appeared before the Judicial Committee on the following charge:
Information Number A4163
THAT on the 5th January 2015 at Otaki, Gary Vile presented CASTLE VIEW, being the wrong horse, in Race 2 of the Otaki Maori Racing Club meeting.
[2] The rule reads as follows:
802 (1) A person commits a breach of these Rules who:
(a) acts in contravention of or fails to comply with any provision of these Rules or any Regulations made thereunder, or any policy, notice, direction, instruction, guideline, restriction, requirement or condition given, made or imposed under these Rules
803 (1) A person who, or body or other entity which, commits or is deemed to have committed a breach of these Rules or any of them for which a penalty is not provided elsewhere in these Rules shall be liable to:
(a) be disqualified for a period not exceeding 12 months; and/or
(b) be suspended from holding or obtaining a Licence for a period not exceeding 12 months. If a Licence is renewed during a term of suspension, then the suspension shall continue to apply to the renewed Licence; and/or
(c) a fine not exceeding $20,000.
[3] Mr Vile confirmed he understood the nature of the charge and that he admitted the breach. We therefore found the charge proved.
[4] Mr Irving produced a signed authority from the Racing Integrity Unit (RIU) to proceed with the charge against Mr Vile.
FACTS
[5] The respondent Gary VILE is a licenced trainer under the Rules of New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing Incorporated. He has been a trainer for approximately 30 years.
[6] At the Otaki-Maori Racing Club’s meeting on Monday 5th January 2015 the horse CASTLE VIEW was an acceptor for Race 2 on the programme. CASTLE VIEW was listed in all documentation (NZTR print-outs and the course race book) as being a 5yo brown mare (Castledale - Turtle View) trained by Mr VILE. The horse was on debut.
[7] During the routine brand inspection it was noted that the brands on the horse presented did not match those of the NZTR records.
[8] Stewards ordered the scratching of the horse and as Mr Vile was not present on course he was advised of the situation via telephone.
[9] When spoken to on the 12th January, Mr Vile stated that it was an honest mistake from his stables for which he accepted ultimate responsibility. He explained the full reasons to the Judicial Committee today.
[10] The mare, Turtle View, had two filly foals over two consecutive years. A foal return was completed for the first foal however the owner failed to complete a foal return for the full sister born one season later.
[11] The first foal, named Castle View, was not trained by Mr Vile and in fact did not ever race.
[12] The second foal was given to Mr Vile to train. Prior to this horse having its first race day start (at Otaki) Mr Vile asked one of his staff to register the now 4yo mare. The staff member did so using the regular NZTR online process.
[13] Unfortunately, due to the absence of a foaling return, this mare was registered in error as its older full sister. (The horse has since been registered as ISLAND VIEW.)
[14] Mr Vile further advised that Island View, then unnamed, was an acceptor at barrier jumpouts in May 2014. Her brands were noted on the day and forwarded to NZTR but for unknown reasons the mistake was not picked up.
[15] Mr Vile has been involved in the thoroughbred racing industry for more than 30 years. He has had no previous charges for presenting the wrong horse.
PENALTY SUBMISSIONS BY INFORMANT
[16] Mr Irving provided the Committee with one previous charge from January 2014. On that occasion a trainer (RIU v M Pitman) was fined the sum of $400 for a breach of the same rule.
[17] The Committee is familiar with two other cases, NZTR v P Harris and NZTR v J Lynds, these each received fines of $600 plus costs.
[18] Mr Vile said that he had been treated very fairly and asked the Committee to take into account the mitigating factors.
DECISION
[19] In coming to our decision we have carefully considered all of the submissions placed before us.
[20] Mr Vile has been a participant within the racing industry for more than 30 years, and he is very mindful of his obligations as a public trainer. He has taken full responsibility for the incorrect horse being presented at the races despite some events being out of his control.
[21] The committee notes Mr Vile’s admission of the breach and his co-operation with the investigation process.
[22] This breach differs from others in that Mr Vile did not confuse two individual horses within his stable. The error was an administrative one.
[23] The first mistake came when the owner failed to submit a foal return. This resulted in only one Castledale/Turtle View foal appearing on the NZTR data base. Further the error was not picked up when the brands were checked at barrier jump outs in May last year.
[24] Mr Vile, as the trainer, has the ultimate responsibility and, by his own admission, said he failed to manually check the brands of the horse involved.
[25] It was our opinion that an appropriate starting point for penalty was a $600 fine. We have taken into account the mitigating factors as outlined above and given Mr Vile credit for these.
PENALTY
[26] Accordingly Mr Vile is fined the sum of $500.
COSTS
[27] As this matter was heard on a race day there was no application for costs.
Nicki Moffatt Tom Castles
Chair Committee Member
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Non-race day
Rules:
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: