Russell v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission - [2020] QCAT 329

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Russell v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2020] QCAT 329

PARTIES: DARREN RUSSELL

(applicant)

v

QUEENSLAND RACING INTEGRITY COMMISSION

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR356-19

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

2 September 2020

HEARING DATE:

21 August 2020

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Fitzpatrick

ORDERS:
1.   The Internal Review decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission dated 1 November 2019 is set aside.

2.   A decision is substituted that:

(a)    Darren Russell breached Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q) on 6 September 2019.

(b)   Darren Russell is suspended for three months with one month wholly suspended for twelve months, commencing one month after the date of this order.

(c)    If Darren Russell engages in any conduct for which a contravention of Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q) is found and a penalty imposed during the period of suspension, the period of suspension will immediately be re-activated and the suspension will be served in full. The matters which are the subject of any new charge will be treated and dealt with as a separate proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:
PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LICENSING OR REGULATION OF OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES OR CALLINGS - where a licensed trainer involved in a physical altercation with another trainer on a public race course – charge of breach of Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q) - penalty

Greyhounds Australasia Rules, Rule 86(q)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 20

Racing Integrity Act 2016 (Qld), s 246

Auld v Queensland Racing Ltd [2013] QCAT 446

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336

El-Issa v Racing Queensland Limited [2011] QCATA 280

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

T Fuller, Gadens Lawyers

Respondent:

S McLeod QC instructed by M Johnston in-house lawyer Queensland Racing Integrity Commission

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr Russell is a licensed greyhound trainer. On 3 October 2019 he was found guilty of a charge pursuant to Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q).
Mr Russell sought an internal review of that decision. He now seeks a review of the internal review decision made 1 November 2019, which confirmed the original decision and penalty of six months’ suspension with three months wholly suspended for twenty-four months.
This Tribunal is given jurisdiction to externally review decisions of the respondent by section 246 of the Racing Integrity Act 2016 (Qld). By section 20 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act) the purpose of the review is to produce the correct and preferable decision. The Tribunal must hear and decide the review by way of a fresh hearing on the merits.
The charge is set out in the Transcript of the Stewards’ Inquiry as:
…you have a charge to answer under Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q)
A person, including an official, shall be guilty of an offence if a person commits or omits to do any act or engages in conduct which in any way is detrimental or prejudicial to the interest, welfare, image, control or promotion of greyhound racing.
The stewards are of the opinion that on 6 September…

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 Russell 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: [2020] QCAT 329
Decision Date: 2 September 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Russell v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission, the respondent, Darren Russell, a licensed greyhound trainer, challenged the decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission to suspend his trainer's licence. This followed an altercation between Mr. Russell and another trainer, Mr. O'Brien, during a public race event. The Commission found Mr. Russell in breach of Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q), which pertains to conduct unbecoming a licensed trainer, and imposed a penalty, including a three-month suspension, one month of which was wholly suspended for twelve months. Mr. Russell sought internal review of the decision, which was ultimately dismissed, leading to his application to the court.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission's decision to suspend Mr. Russell's licence was lawful, reasonable, and just. The court had to determine whether the Commission's finding of a breach of Rule 86(q) was supported by the evidence and whether the penalty imposed was appropriate in the circumstances. Additionally, the court examined whether the Commission had exercised its powers in an arbitrary or irrational manner.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the evidence supported the Commission's conclusion that Mr. Russell had breached Rule 86(q). The court noted that the altercation, which was captured on video and witnessed by multiple individuals, demonstrated a level of misconduct that warranted disciplinary action. The court also found that the penalty imposed was reasonable, considering the seriousness of the breach and the need to maintain the integrity of the greyhound racing industry. The court further held that the Commission had exercised its powers lawfully and reasonably, and that the decision to suspend Mr. Russell's licence was just.

The court set aside the internal review decision and substituted its own decision, affirming the original penalty imposed by the Commission. The court emphasised that if Mr. Russell engaged in any further misconduct during the suspension period, the suspension would be reactivated, and he would serve the full penalty. The court also clarified that any new charges arising from future misconduct would be treated as separate proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The Internal Review decision of the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission dated 1 November 2019 is set aside.

2. A decision is substituted that:

(a) Darren Russell breached Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q) on 6 September 2019.

(b) Darren Russell is suspended for three months with one month wholly suspended for twelve months, commencing one month after the date of this order.

(c) If Darren Russell engages in any conduct for which a contravention of Greyhounds Australasia Rule 86(q) is found and a penalty imposed during the period of suspension, the period of suspension will immediately be re-activated and the suspension will be served in full. The matters which are the subject of any new charge will be treated and dealt with as a separate proceeding.

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.