Jerrick v Greyhound & Harness Racing Regulatory Authority & Anor [2008] NSWSC 203

Jerrick v Greyhound & Harness Racing Regulatory Authority & Anor [2008] NSWSC 203

The application failed because no denial of procedural fairness or jurisdictional error was established. Although the Tribunal relied on specialist knowledge about intramuscular dissipation without prior disclosure, Mr Jerrick did not show on any reasonably arguable basis that relevant evidence or submissions were available that he lost the opportunity to present. The Tribunal was not under a duty to provide a complete transcript or reasons, and its reasons were in any event adequate. It conducted the required new hearing, considered the material and penalty independently, and lawfully affirmed disqualification subject to reducing it to eight months. Its comments about possible drug build...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Supreme Court Supervisory Review of Greyhound and Harness Racing Appeals Tribunal Decision Disqualifying the Applicant From Training Horses for Eight Months
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'specialist Tribunal Knowledge' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'transcript of Tribunal Proceedings' 'absolute Liability' 'prohibited Substances in Harness Racing']
['administrative Law' 'racing Regulation'] ['procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error' 'specialist Tribunal Knowledge' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'transcript of Tribunal Proceedings' 'absolute Liability' 'prohibited Substances in Harness Racing']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review / Supreme Court Supervisory Review of Greyhound and Harness Racing Appeals Tribunal Decision Disqualifying the Applicant From Training Horses for Eight Months

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal denied procedural fairness by relying on specialist knowledge about slower dissipation of intramuscular injections without giving the applicant an opportunity to address it.' 'Whether the Tribunal denied procedural fairness by failing to provide a complete transcript of its proceedings.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons for imposing disqualification rather than a fine.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to exercise its jurisdiction to conduct a new hearing under s 21 of the Greyhound and Harness Racing Administration Act 2004.' 'Whether the Tribunal made a finding that heptaminol was cumulative without evidence.' 'Whether r 190 of the Australian Harness Racing Rules required a mental element or created an offence of absolute liability.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application failed because no denial of procedural fairness or jurisdictional error was established. Although the Tribunal relied on specialist knowledge about intramuscular dissipation without prior disclosure, Mr Jerrick did not show on any reasonably arguable basis that relevant evidence or submissions were available that he lost the opportunity to present. The Tribunal was not under a duty to provide a complete transcript or reasons, and its reasons were in any event adequate. It conducted the required new hearing, considered the material and penalty independently, and lawfully affirmed disqualification subject to reducing it to eight months. Its comments about possible drug build...

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the application (or summons) of Mr Jerrick herein.' 'Order Mr Jerrick to pay the costs of the Authority and those of the Tribunal as a submitting defendant of these proceedings.' 'Discharge the order of this Court of 17 May 2007 staying the disqualification of Mr Jerrick pursuant to the determination of...