Smith v Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board - [2017] QCAT 7

CITATION:

Smith v Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board [2017] QCAT 7

PARTIES:	Don Smith (Applicant)
v
Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR046-16

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Deane

DELIVERED ON:

13 January 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. Don Smith is to pay a fine in the sum of $5,000 by 4:00pm 31 March 2017.

2. Any application for costs is to be made by a party by filing in the Tribunal one (1) copy and providing to the other party one (1) copy of any submissions and evidence upon which the party wishes to rely by 4:00pm 31 January 2017.

3. If any application for costs is made in accordance with order 2:

a. the other party must file in the Tribunal one (1) copy and provide to the applying party one (1) copy of any submissions on costs including any evidence in reply by 4:00pm 14 February 2017.

b. The application for costs will be determined on the papers unless a party requests an oral hearing not before 4:00pm 14 February 2017.

4. If no application for costs is made in accordance with order 2, there will be no order as to costs in this proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LICENSING OR REGULATION OF OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES OR CALLINGS – Harness Racing Trainer – contravention of Australian Harness Racing Rule 193(3) by administering ‘medication’ on race day – factors to be considered in determining appropriate penalty

AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111
Wallace v Racing Queensland [2007] QDC 168
Bita v Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board t/as Racing Queensland [2014] QCAT 460
Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board v Thomas [2016] QCATA 82
Abbott v Racing Queensland Limited [2012] QCAT 230

APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT:

represented by Mr S Neaves of Counsel

RESPONDENT:

represented by Mr A. James of Counsel instructed by Fowler Lawyers

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr Smith was the trainer of the standard bred, ‘A Good Chance’, on 16 May 2015 when it competed at Albion Park and finished third. A pre-race blood sample was taken and analysed. The sample showed total plasma carbon dioxide (TCO2) concentration of 36.0 mmol/L and the reserve sample showed 35.5 mmol/L.
Following a Stewards’ inquiry Mr Smith was found to have breached rule 193(3) of the Australian Harness Racing (AHR) Rules in that he administered or allowed or caused to be administered medication, meaning a treatment with drugs or any other substances, on race day. The Stewards disqualified ‘A Good Chance’ from its finishing position and fined Mr Smith $5000 because they found that the horse had received an alkalising agent on race day.
Mr Smith appealed to the Queensland Racing Disciplinary Board (the Board), which dismissed the appeal both on conviction and penalty.

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 Smith v Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board 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: [2017] QCAT 7
Decision Date: 13 January 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Smith v Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board was a dispute between Don Smith, a harness racing trainer, and the Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board. The matter arose due to Smith's alleged contravention of Australian Harness Racing Rule 193(3) by administering medication to a horse on race day. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal was tasked with determining the appropriate penalty for Smith's actions.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was to ascertain the appropriate penalty for Smith's breach of the harness racing rule. In reaching a decision, the Tribunal had to consider various factors, including the severity of the breach, Smith's conduct, and any mitigating circumstances. The Tribunal was also required to balance the need to deter future breaches with the potential impact of the penalty on Smith's livelihood.

In delivering its decision, the Tribunal found that Smith had contravened the relevant rule by administering medication on race day, which was a serious breach. However, the Tribunal took into account several mitigating factors, including Smith's lack of previous disciplinary issues and his genuine belief that the medication was not prohibited. The Tribunal concluded that a fine of $5,000 was the appropriate penalty. The Tribunal also made orders regarding the process for any applications for costs in the matter.

The final orders included a requirement for Smith to pay a fine of $5,000 by a specified date. The Tribunal outlined a process for any party to apply for costs, including deadlines for filing submissions and evidence. If no application for costs was made, there would be no order as to costs in the proceeding.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Don Smith is to pay a fine in the sum of $5,000 by 4:00pm 31 March 2017.

3. If any application for costs is made in accordance with order 2:

a. the other party must file in the Tribunal one (1) copy and provide to the applying party one (1) copy of any submissions on costs including any evidence in reply by 4:00pm 14 February 2017.

b. The application for costs will be determined on the papers unless a party requests an oral hearing not before 4:00pm 14 February 2017.

4. If no application for costs is made in accordance with order 2, there will be no order as to costs in this 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.