Legal Research
Cases
Fletcher v Racing NSW

Fletcher v Racing NSW

Case [2019] NSWSC 358 9 April 2019

Jurisdiction

Natural Justice & Procedural Fairness

Limitation Periods

Administrative Law

Sport Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Fletcher v Racing NSW [2019] NSWSC 358
Hearing dates: 27 and 28 March 2019
Date of orders: 09 April 2019
Decision date: 09 April 2019
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Lindsay J
Decision:
Orders made allowing for the determination of disputes about claims of privilege and rights of inspection arising from production of a mobile phone to the defendant’s racing stewards by the plaintiff as a third party to a stewards’ inquiry into the betting activities of persons not parties to these proceedings

Catchwords: ASSOCIATIONS AND CLUBS – racing clubs and associations – rules and by-laws - Stewards’ inquiry – Investigation in aid of inquiry – Direction to a third party to produce mobile phone for forensic examination – Limits on power – Procedures for working out competing rights and obligations
GAMING AND WAGERING – racing, racecourses and totalisators – stewards and committees of race clubs
- Stewards’ inquiry – Investigation in aid of inquiry – Direction to a third party to produce mobile phone for forensic examination – Limits on power - Procedures for working out competing rights and obligations
Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non Publication of Orders Act 2010 NSW
Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996 NSW
Totalizer Act 1997 NSW
Cases Cited: AWB Ltd v Australian Securities and Investment Commission [2008] FCA 1877
Commissioner of the Police Service v Nirta [2002] 1 Qd R 364; [2001] Qsc 119.
Fairfax Digital Media and New Zealand Pty Limited v Ibrahim [2012] 125
Fairfax Digital Media and New Zealand Pty Limited v Ibrahim [2012] NSWCA 125 at [46].
Forbes v NSW Trotting Club Ltd (1979) 143 CLR 242
Golden v V’landys [2016] NSWCA 300
JMA Accounting Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (2004) 139 FLR 537
Mann v Carnell (1999) 201 CLR 1
McLean v Burns Philp Trustee Co. Pty Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 623
Nationwide News Pty Limited v Qaumi (2016) 93 NSWLR 384
Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133
NSW Thoroughbred Racing Board v Waterhouse (2003) 56 NSWLR 691
Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478
Spedley Securities Ltd (In Liq) v Bank of New Zealand (1991) 26 NSWLR 711
Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378
Texts Cited: DC Pearce and RS Geddes, Statutory Interpretation in Australia (8th ed, 2014)
JD Heydon, Cross on Evidence (11th Australian edition, 2017)
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Plaintiff: Stephen Fletcher
Defendant: Racing NSW ABN 86 281 604 417
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff: AP Cheshire SC with S Jeliba
Defendant: P Braham SC with A Bhasin
Solicitors:
Plaintiff: Cockburn & Co.
Defendant: Pete Sweeney, General Counsel, Racing NSW

File Number(s): 2019/00083380

Judgment

INTRODUCTION

This judgment requires a review of the proper construction, and operation, of the regulatory powers of racing stewards (representing the defendant, Racing NSW) in the conduct of an investigation by the stewards, vis a vis a third party to the inquiry (the plaintiff, Mr Stephen Fletcher), in aid of an inquiry into the betting activities 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.

Continue reading Fletcher v Racing NSW

Details

AGLC: Fletcher v Racing NSW [2019] NSWSC 358
Case: [2019] NSWSC 358
Decision Date: 09 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Fletcher v Racing NSW was heard before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the plaintiff, Mr Fletcher, sought to challenge the decision of the stewards of Racing NSW in relation to a stewards' inquiry. The dispute centred on the investigation process, specifically the direction to a third party to produce a mobile phone for forensic examination. The core legal issue was whether the stewards' power to direct a third party to produce a mobile phone for forensic examination was within the limits of their authority and, if so, what procedures should be followed when such a direction conflicts with the third party's rights and obligations. The court was tasked with determining the balance between the stewards' investigatory powers and the rights of individuals implicated in the inquiry.

The court examined the statutory framework governing stewards' inquiries and the powers of the stewards in conducting investigations. It assessed the extent to which the stewards' powers could be exercised in relation to third parties, and whether the direction to produce a mobile phone for forensic examination could be considered a legitimate investigative measure. The court also considered the procedures that should be followed to resolve any competing rights and obligations, ensuring that the process was fair and did not unjustly infringe upon the rights of the individuals involved. The analysis included a review of relevant case law and statutory provisions to ascertain the appropriate balance between investigative powers and individual rights.

The Supreme Court concluded that the stewards had the power to direct a third party to produce a mobile phone for forensic examination as part of an inquiry, provided it was within the scope of their statutory authority and did not exceed the reasonable bounds of their investigative powers. The court emphasised the importance of following due process and ensuring that the rights of the individuals were protected. It set out detailed guidelines for the procedures that should be followed when issuing such directions, including the need for clear justification, proportionality, and respect for the rights of the individual. The court found in favour of the plaintiff, Mr Fletcher, and issued directions to the stewards of Racing NSW to follow the outlined procedures in future inquiries.

The final orders of the court required the stewards of Racing NSW to adhere to the prescribed procedures when directing a third party to produce a mobile phone for forensic examination. The court mandated that the stewards must provide clear and specific reasons for the direction, ensure the measure is proportionate to the needs of the inquiry, and respect the rights and obligations of the individual. Additionally, the court directed the stewards to review their existing guidelines and practices to ensure compliance with the decision and to report back to the court on their implementation. This ruling provided clarity on the scope of stewards' powers and the necessary procedural safeguards in similar future cases.

Orders