RACEDAY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DECISION

Informant: S P Renault, Stipendiary Steward

Defendant: C T Dalgety, Licensed Public Trainer

Information No: 68559

Meeting: New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club

Date: 22 July 2010

Venue: Addington Raceway, Christchurch

Race: 8

Rule No: 865 (4)

Judicial Committee: R G McKenzie, Chairman – K G Hales, Panellist

Plea: Admitted

Also present:

FACTS:

Following the running of Race 8, Tradestaff Mobile Pace, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S P Renault, against Licensed Public Trainer, Mr C T Dalgety, alleging a breach of Rule 865 (4)  in that Mr Dalgety, as the trainer of SMILING SHARD in the race, “failed to advise that this horse would not be racing with pull down blinds as previously notified”.

Mr D J Dunn, Licensed Junior Driver, as agent for Mr Dalgety, had signed the Statement by the Defendant on the information form indicating, firstly, that the breach was admitted and, secondly, that he did not wish to be present at the hearing of the information.

Rule 865 provides as follows:

(4)     The trainer and/or person in control of a horse shall present such horse in the assembly area with the same or identical gear, or with such different gear as has been notified as required by the foregoing provisions of this Rule.

SUBMISSION(S):

Mr Renault informed the Committee that SMILING SHARD, trained by Mr Dalgety, had raced in Race 8 without the pull down blinds that had been previously notified to Harness Racing New Zealand. Mr Dunn’s explanation was that the horse had raced on 16 July without pull down blinds. However, Mr Renault explained, that race was a non-tote event and the horse was required to be presented for tonight’s race with the notified gear that it wore in its last start in a totalisator race – that is to say, pull down blinds.

DECISION:

The charge was found proved.

SUBMISSION(S) ON PENALTY:

Mr Renault informed asked the Committee to take into account that SMILING SHARD was a warm favourite for the race, which was the principal race on the night’s programme. He also said that Mr Dalgety had a poor record in terms of breaches of the Rule. He submitted that a fine of $200 was appropriate.

REASONS:

The Committee took into account Mr Dalgety’s admission of the breach. However, aggravating features were, as pointed out by Mr Renault, that SMILING SHARD had been well supported in the betting and, also, that Mr Dalgety had breached the Rule on a number of previous occasions.

PENALTY:

Mr Dalgety was fined the sum of $200.

R G McKenzie                  K G Hales

Chairman                        Committee Member

68559