Waldron v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission - [2023] QCAT 191

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Waldron v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2023] QCAT 191

PARTIES:

BENJAMIN WALDRON

(applicant)

v

QUEENSLAND RACING INTEGRITY COMMISSION

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR278-19

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

16 May 2023

HEARING DATE:

20 March 2023

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member D. Katter

ORDERS:

The decision of the Respondent dated 1 July 2019 is set aside in respect of penalty and in substitution it is ordered that no penalty is imposed on the Applicant for contravention of rule 178 of the Australian Rules of Racing.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – LICENSING OR REGULATION OF OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES OR CALLINGS – OTHER PROFESSIONS, TRADES AND CALLINGS – where administration of prohibited substance – where consideration of factors related to penalty – whether appropriate penalty includes suspension

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009

Australian Rules of Racing

Morrisey v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission [2018] QCAT 161

Queensland All Codes Racing Industry Board v Thomas [2016] QCATA 83
Queensland Racing Integrity Commission v Scott [2019] QCATA 121
R v Morrison [1999] 1 Qd R 397
Wallace v Racing Queensland [2007] QDC 168

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

M. White instructed by P. Boyce, Solicitor, Butler McDermott Lawyers

Respondent:

D. Payard instructed by M. Johnston, in house solicitor for the Respondent

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Applicant had been a trainer of racehorses for some 17 years[1], based in Roma, Queensland[2].
[1]Section 21(2) Documents, page 88, paragraph 11(e).
[2]Transcript of Inquiry dated 18 April 2018, page 2, paragraph 20.
In 2017, the Applicant was a licensed trainer with the Respondent[3].
[3]Transcript of Inquiry dated 18 April 2018, page 2, paragraph 25.
The horse, Reverse Logic, was trained by the Applicant for some 11 or so weeks in 2017, before being nominated for a race at Rockhampton, Queensland, on 13 July 2017[4].
[4]Transcript of Inquiry dated 18 April 2018, page 3, paragraph 5.
Reverse Logic won the Benchmark 55 Handicap at Rockhampton on 13 July 2017. This was the first start for this horse under the Applicant’s training.
After the race on 13 July 2017 a sample of urine was taken from Reverse Logic.
A urine sample was received at the Racing Science Centre on 14 July 2017. The consignment number of that sample matched the consignment number on the sample as recorded after the race on 13 July 2017.
The Racing Science Centre tested the urine sample and found the sample to have a cobalt reading of greater than 200 micrograms per litre, with a ‘measurement of uncertainty of plus or minus 8 micrograms per litre at greater than or equal to 99.7 percent confidence’.
Another sample from Reverse Logic was sent to Racing Analytical Services in Melbourne, Victoria. That sample was received with the seal intact on 1 August 2017. The result of the analysis at Racing Analytical Services was that the sample had cobalt at greater than 200ugl.
An inquiry was conducted by the Stewards on 18 April 2018.
On 1 July…

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 Waldron 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: [2023] QCAT 191
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Benjamin Waldron, a horse trainer, sought judicial review of a decision by the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission (QRIC) to disqualify his horse, Reverse Logic, from a race and to impose a penalty on him for a breach of the Australian Rules of Racing. The Tribunal had to determine whether the penalty imposed by QRIC was appropriate, given the circumstances of the case. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether the penalty should be set aside and, if so, what alternative penalty, if any, should be imposed. The Tribunal found that the penalty imposed by QRIC was not appropriate because the elevated levels of cobalt in the horse's urine were caused by contaminated feed, which was not the fault of the Applicant. The Tribunal also found that the Applicant had been able to show a specific explanation for the elevated cobalt level, which did not involve any blameworthiness on his part. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed by QRIC and ordered that no penalty be imposed on the Applicant for contravention of rule 178 of the Australian Rules of Racing.

The final orders of the Tribunal were that the decision of the QRIC dated 1 July 2019 is set aside in respect of penalty and, in substitution, it is ordered that no penalty is imposed on the Applicant for contravention of rule 178 of the Australian Rules of Racing. The disqualification of Reverse Logic from the Benchmark 55 Handicap race in 2017, as stated by the Stewards on 1 July 2019, remains in place.

Orders