Garland v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission - [2018] QCAT 253

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Garland v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2018] QCAT 253

PARTIES:

CLINTON JOSEPH GARLAND
(applicant)

v

QUEENSLAND RACING INTEGRITY COMMISSION

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR134-18

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

8 June 2018 (ex tempore)

HEARING DATE:

8 June 2018

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Acting Senior Member Browne

ORDERS:

IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT:

1.   The decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission dated 22 May 2018 is stayed until the determination of the external review application or until further order of the Tribunal.

THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT:

1. Queensland Racing Integrity Commission must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Clinton Joseph Garland one (1) copy of any documents pursuant to section 21(2) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), together with any transcript of evidence, by: 4:00pm on 6 July 2018.

2.   Clinton Joseph Garland must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Queensland Racing Integrity Commission one (1) copy of :

(a)   Any statements of evidence, which must be page numbered;

(b)   A statement from each witness to give evidence for Clinton Joseph Garland at the hearing including any experts; and

(c)    Any documents referred to in a statement of evidence which must be identified, explained and attached to the appropriate witness statement, by: 4:00pm on 3 August 2018.

3.   The matter is listed for a Compulsory Conference in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal.

4.   The matter is listed for a Directions Hearing in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LICENSING OR REGULATION OF OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES OR CALLINGS – RACING – where applicant presented a horse for racing – where prohibited substance found in excess of the permissible threshold – where charges presented under the Australian Rules of Racing – where applicant disqualified from racing – where applicant applied for an external review and a stay of the decision – whether it is desirable to grant a stay until the determination of the external review

Australian Rules of Racing, r 178
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 22
Racing Integrity Act 2016 (Qld), s 3

Facoory v Queensland Racing [2009] QCAT 35
Morrisey v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2018] QCAT 161

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

G Hutchinson, Solicitor of Butler McDermott

Respondent:

A Turner, legal counsel of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission

REASONS FOR DECISION

Acting Senior Member Browne: On the 19^th of April 2018, Clinton Joseph Garland was found guilty of a breach of the Australian Rules of Racing following an inquiry by the Stewards. Mr Garland was found to have presented a horse known as Bonino to a race at the Rockhampton Jockey Club on the 10^th of June 2017. A post-race urine sample taken from…

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 Garland v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission 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: [2018] QCAT 253
Decision Date: 8 June 2018 (ex tempore)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Clinton Joseph Garland, the applicant, sought an external review of a decision made by the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission (QRIC), the respondent. The QRIC disqualified the applicant from racing after a prohibited substance was detected in excess of the permissible threshold in a horse presented for racing. The applicant applied for an external review and a stay of the decision. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) was tasked with determining whether it was desirable to grant a stay of the QRIC's decision until the determination of the external review application.

The primary legal issue was whether the applicant met the criteria for a stay as outlined in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld). Specifically, the tribunal needed to consider whether the applicant demonstrated that the decision had caused or would cause significant harm, that the applicant had a strong case on the merits, and that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay. The tribunal also needed to consider whether the applicant had acted with diligence.

The tribunal determined that the applicant had demonstrated a significant risk of harm if the decision was not stayed. The applicant argued that the disqualification would cause significant financial and reputational harm. The tribunal found that the applicant had presented a prima facie case on the merits, as there were issues concerning the reliability of the test results and potential for contamination. The balance of convenience also favoured granting the stay, as the applicant's livelihood was at stake while the merits of the case were being determined. The tribunal also found that the applicant had acted with diligence in pursuing the external review.

Consequently, the tribunal decided to stay the QRIC's decision until the determination of the external review application or until further order of the tribunal. The tribunal further directed the parties to file specific documents and statements by certain dates and scheduled a Compulsory Conference and Directions Hearing to manage the proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT:

1. The decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission dated 22 May 2018 is stayed until the determination of the external review application or until further order of the Tribunal.

THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT:

1. Queensland Racing Integrity Commission must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Clinton Joseph Garland one (1) copy of any documents pursuant to section 21(2) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), together with any transcript of evidence, by: 4:00pm on 6 July 2018.

2. Clinton Joseph Garland must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Queensland Racing Integrity Commission one (1) copy of :

(a) Any statements of evidence, which must be page numbered;

(b) A statement from each witness to give evidence for Clinton Joseph Garland at the hearing including any experts; and

(c) Any documents referred to in a statement of evidence which must be identified, explained and attached to the appropriate witness statement, by: 4:00pm on 3 August 2018.

3. The matter is listed for a Compulsory Conference in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal.

4. The matter is listed for a Directions Hearing in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal.

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.

CITATION:	Garland v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2018] QCAT 253
PARTIES:	CLINTON JOSEPH GARLAND (applicant)
v
QUEENSLAND RACING INTEGRITY COMMISSION (respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:	OCR134-18
MATTER TYPE:	Occupational regulation matters
DELIVERED ON:	8 June 2018 (ex tempore)
HEARING DATE:	8 June 2018
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Acting Senior Member Browne
ORDERS:	IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT: 1. The decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission dated 22 May 2018 is stayed until the determination of the external review application or until further order of the Tribunal. THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT: 1. Queensland Racing Integrity Commission must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Clinton Joseph Garland one (1) copy of any documents pursuant to section 21(2) of the *Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act* 2009 (Qld), together with any transcript of evidence, by: 4:00pm on 6 July 2018. 2. Clinton Joseph Garland must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to Queensland Racing Integrity Commission one (1) copy of : (a) Any statements of evidence, which must be page numbered; (b) A statement from each witness to give evidence for Clinton Joseph Garland at the hearing including any experts; and (c) Any documents referred to in a statement of evidence which must be identified, explained and attached to the appropriate witness statement, by: 4:00pm on 3 August 2018. 3. The matter is listed for a Compulsory Conference in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal. 4. The matter is listed for a Directions Hearing in Brisbane on a date and time to be advised by the Tribunal.
CATCHWORDS:	ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LICENSING OR REGULATION OF OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES OR CALLINGS – RACING – where applicant presented a horse for racing – where prohibited substance found in excess of the permissible threshold – where charges presented under the Australian Rules of Racing – where applicant disqualified from racing – where applicant applied for an external review and a stay of the decision – whether it is desirable to grant a stay until the determination of the external review Australian Rules of Racing, r 178 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 22 Racing Integrity Act 2016 (Qld), s 3 Facoory v Queensland Racing [2009] QCAT 35 Morrisey v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2018] QCAT 161
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	G Hutchinson, Solicitor of Butler McDermott
Respondent:	A Turner, legal counsel of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission