Oamaru HRC 1 December 2018 – R 5 (heard 8 December 2018 at Addington) – Chair, Mr T Utikere

hearingid: 9140c0e6761c9977eff37b6d05e07d32

informantnumber:

horsename:

hearing_racingtype: harness-racing

startdate: 01/12/2018

newcharge:

plea:

penaltyrequired:

decisiondate: no date provided

hearing_title: Oamaru HRC 1 December 2018 - R 5 (heard 8 December 2018 at Addington) - Chair, Mr T Utikere

charge:

facts:

appealdecision:

isappeal:

submissionsfordecision:

reasonsfordecision:

Decision:

BEFORE A JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE

JUDICIAL CONTROL AUTHORITY

UNDER THE RACING ACT 2003

IN THE MATTER of the Rules of Harness Racing

BETWEEN RACING INTEGRITY UNIT

Informant

AND W Stapleton

Respondent

Judicial Committee: Mr T Utikere (Chairman)

Ms H Weston (Member)

Parties: Mr S Renault (for the RIU)

Mr W Stapleton (as the Respondent)

Venue: Heard at Addington Raceway

Date of Oral Decision: 8 December 2018

WRITTEN DECISION OF THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DATED 10 DECEMBER 2018

FACTS

[1] The Respondent has been charged with a breach of Rule 403(m)(ii) of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Racing.

[2] Rule 403(m) states: “Any mare or filly after day 120 of its pregnancy. A trainer shall notify Stipendiary Stewards in writing as soon as practical: ... (ii) the date of last service of such mare or filly.”

[3] Information A10886 was filed with the Judicial Committee at the Oamaru HRC Meeting on 1 December 2018. The Information specifically alleged that Mr Stapleton had “...failed to notify the last date of service of your mare REGAL SUZY”.

[4] The Information was signed by the respondent and identified that he admitted the breach and that did did not wish to be present at the hearing of the Information. The Judicial Committee of the day had adjourned this matter sine die.

SUBMISSIONS

[6] Mr Renault advised that Mr Stapleton had not advised stewards of the last date of service.

[7] REGAL SUZY had raced at Oamaru and won. The horse had been performing average in recent starts so the trainer was asked for his comment on the improved performance of the horse. Mr Stapleton replied that it had been freshened since last racing, had been working well and he also added that it was racing in foal. Mr Renault stated this was the first they knew of that. Mr Stapleton had confirmed that the mare had been served 22 October, but that the mare had not been scanned. He assumed it was in foal but had nothing official.

[8] Mr Renault submitted that punters often invested money on horses that were in foal as some horses race better in that situation, and that punters were entitled to be aware of such information.

[9] Mr Stapleton advised stewards that he was simply ignorant of the rule as he was not aware that such a rule existed.

DECISION

[10] As the charge was admitted, the Committee found the charge proved.

PENALTY SUBMISSIONS

[11] Mr Renault advised that the respondent had a Trainers’ Licence since 1976, and that he had a clean record. There had been no charge under this rule in the previous 18 years., not was their a defined starting point in the JCA Penalty Guidelines. He believed a $200 fine was appropriate due to punters being aware that the horse may have been racing in foal.

[12] In response to a question from the Committee, he said that submission was based on previous breaches of Rule 305(a) in the New Zealand Thoroughbred Rules of Racing which related to a lack of advising stewards of something that may affect a horse in a race. He also re-emphasised that REGAL SUZY went on to win the race.

REASONS FOR PENALTY

[13] The Committee considered the submissions placed before us by Mr Renault. There was an obligation on the respondent to have informed the stewards that his mare had been served. We have been referred to two previous breaches in the thoroughbred code, which have been of assistance to us.

[14] In the Raceday Decision of RIU v Tyler (RIU v K Tyler, Otago RC 25 January 2018) the Respondent was charged with failed to advise stewards that the horse in question was in foal. In that written decision, it refers to the fact that Stipendiary Steward Mark Davidson states: “Just recently a trainer was fined $100 for failing to notify a mare had been served”.

[15] In the absence of any previous breaches of Rule 403(m)(ii) we consider it appropriate to impose a similar penalty to that referred to in the Tyler decision by Mr Davidson for failing to advise of service.

PENALTY

[16] Mr Stapleton is fined $100.

Signed at Palmerston North this 10th day of December 2018.

Mr Tangi Utikere

Chairman

sumissionsforpenalty:

reasonsforpenalty:

penalty:

hearing_type: Old Hearing

Rules: 403(m)(ii)

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: