Moodie v Racing Integrity Commissioner

The case of Moodie v Racing Integrity Commissioner involved a dispute between the respondent, Moodie, a horse owner and director of the Board of Racing Victoria, and the appellant, the Racing Integrity Commissioner. The dispute arose out of an investigation into allegations that Moodie had disclosed to horse trainers, whose horses had tested positive for cobalt, information that their horses had tested positive. The Racing Integrity Council of Racing Victoria referred the matter to the Commissioner, who conducted an investigation and made findings of misconduct against Moodie. After delivering a confidential report to Racing Victoria, the Commissioner published a media release disclosing the findings and details of the investigation. Moodie applied for a declaration that the Commissioner had breached the rules of natural justice by failing to accord him procedural fairness. The primary issue before the court was whether the Commissioner's conduct in publishing the media release gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court was required to determine whether a fair-minded lay observer, having regard to the material before the court, could reasonably conclude that the Commissioner might not have fairly and impartially conducted the investigation and made the findings.

The court held that the Commissioner's conduct in publishing the media release did give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The court found that the Commissioner was in a position of accuser, investigator, and determiner, which created an appearance of bias. The court held that the standard of impartiality expected of persons exercising statutory investigative functions is high and that a fair-minded lay observer could reasonably conclude that the Commissioner might not have fairly and impartially conducted the investigation and made the findings. The court also held that the Commissioner's subsequent conduct and statements were relevant when assessing whether a reasonable apprehension of bias could be maintained in respect of the concluded proceeding or decision.

The court further held that the Commissioner's conduct in publishing the media release was a breach of the rules of natural justice. The court held that the Commissioner had failed to accord Moodie procedural fairness by not providing him with an opportunity to respond to the allegations before the media release was published. The court also held that the Commissioner's conduct had undermined the integrity of the investigation and the findings. The court concluded that the Commissioner had breached the rules of natural justice and that Moodie was entitled to a declaration to that effect. The court also made orders for costs and legal representation.