Dixon v Racing Queensland Limited - [2012] QCAT 331

CITATION:

Dixon v Racing Queensland Limited [2012] QCAT 331

PARTIES:	Grant Williams Dixon (Applicant)
v
Racing Queensland Limited (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR217-12

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

6 July 2012

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Mr Richard Oliver, Senior Member
Ms Michelle Howard, Member

DELIVERED ON:

30 July 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. The respondent’s decision on penalty is set aside and instead an order is made that no penalty be imposed.

CATCHWORDS:

Racing – where the applicant presented a horse with an elevated total carbon dioxide level above the prescribed limit – where charged with a breach of Australian Harness Racing Rules 190 – where applicant admitted to administering a supplement to the horse prior to a race – where subsequent testing of the supplement established that the supplement was the cause of the elevated reading – where applicant established he was not blameworthy – where penalty of 6 months disqualification set aside and no penalty imposed

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 19, 20

Racing Act 2002, ss 143 , 352A

Australian Harness Racing Rules, rules 188,188A

Wallace v Queensland Racing [2007] QDC 168
Kehl v Board of Professional Engineers of Qld [2010] QCATA 58
Abbott v Racing Queensland Ltd [2012] QCAT 230
Leitenberger v Racing Queensland Ltd [2012] QCAT 248
Lawler v Racing Queensland Ltd [2012] QCAT 255

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:

Mr Murdoch SC instructed by Gabriel Ruddy and Garrett for the applicant

RESPONDENT:

Mr James instructed by Racing Queensland Ltd for the respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr Dixon was the trainer of the standard bred filly Mamanuca. She competed in a race at Redcliffe on 8 June 2012. Before the race, a blood sample was taken from her and on analysis, was found to have a total carbon dioxide (TCO2) level in excess of the prescribed limit of 36mmmol/L per litre. The Australian Harness Racing Rules (AHRR) provide that alkalinising agents, when evidenced by total carbon dioxide present at a concentration of 36mmol/L per litre in plasma, is a prohibited substance.[1]
[1] AHRR 188 and 188A.
Because of the excessive TCO2 Mr Dixon was charged with a breach of AHRR 190 which provides that a horse shall be presented for a race free of prohibited substance and if the horse is presented with a prohibited substance, the trainer is guilty of an offence.
Stewards convened an inquiry on 21 June 2012 and found Mr Dixon guilty of a breach of rule 190. As a consequence of the breach they imposed a penalty of a disqualification from holding a trainers license for 6 months.
On 22 June 2012 Mr Dixon filed an application in the Tribunal to review the decision of the stewards. The Tribunal’s function on a review application is to hear and decide the review by way of a fresh hearing on the merits with the purpose of producing the “correct and preferable decision”. In doing so, the Tribunal has all the functions of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Dixon v Racing Queensland Limited and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2012] QCAT 331
Decision Date: 30 July 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Dixon, faced a charge brought by the respondent, Racing Queensland Limited, for presenting a horse with an elevated total carbon dioxide level at a race, which breached the Australian Harness Racing Rules. Dixon admitted to administering a supplement to the horse before the race, but argued that the elevated reading was due to the supplement and not due to any fault on his part. The case was heard by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which was asked to determine whether Dixon was blameworthy for the breach and to decide on an appropriate penalty if he was found to be at fault. The Tribunal considered the evidence presented regarding the supplement and Dixon’s actions, and concluded that he was not blameworthy. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed by the respondent and ordered that no penalty be imposed on Dixon. This decision highlights the importance of establishing fault in cases involving breaches of racing regulations and the potential for penalties to be overturned if the party charged can demonstrate they were not at fault.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The respondent’s decision on penalty is set aside and instead an order is made that no penalty be imposed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.