FAR REACHING VERDICT REACHED IN THE ALLIGATOR BLOOD 'DISQUALIFICATION' COURT CASE

By Graham Potter | Friday, December 23, 2022

The dramatic disqualification of Alligator Blood from the 2020, $2 million Magic Millions Guineas had an equally dramatic sequel in the Supreme Court on Friday when the Judge Burns handed down a ruling in favour of Alan Endresz, who was the majority share owner of Alligator Blood at the time of the horse’s win ... and subsequent disqualification ... in the Magic Millions Guineas.

The case, listed as Endresz v Queensland Racing Integrity Commission and others, brought the following conclusion (as taken from the court papers).

‘THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT:

‘It is declared that the disqualification by the first respondent* on 23 July 2020 of the horse, Alligator Blood, from his first placing in Race 6 of the Gold Coast Magic Millions meeting held on 11 January 2020 is void and of no effect;

‘The respondents** pay the applicants’ cost of the application to be assessed on the standard basis.’

*The first respondent is the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission.

** The respondents are the Queensland Racing Integrity Commission and the Racing Queensland Board.

Of particular interest is the fact that this conclusion was seemingly reached solely on the point of natural justice being denied to Alligator Blood’s owners at the time of the disqualification hearing.

The fact that Alligator Blood did produce a positive post-race swab to a prohibitive substance is not contested but, apart from it being referred to, it was not in any way a serious part of proceedings before for the court.

It was all about whether the owners had been allowed, or denied, natural justice.

Again, from Judge Burns’ summary:

‘It follows that it was an implied term of the contract that the stewards were obliged to observe the principles of natural justice by providing notice of their hearing to the owners and an opportunity to them to be heard before any finding were made. That did not occur and, as such, the hearing was procedurally flawed.

‘I add for clarity, the opportunity for the owners to be heard must be meaningful before it can be properly exercised. For that reason, not only should the owners have been provided with notice of the hearing, they should have also been provided with a copy of the results of the analysis of the sample taken from their horse following the race along with a copy of the procedures governing the collection and analysis of the sample as well as the records generated in connection with the actual collection, sampling and analysis in this case.’

And then:

“Because of this procedural breach, the disqualification which resulted from the findings made by the stewards is void and no effect.’

Judge Burns thirteen-page summary obviously contains a lot more details of the entire case and makes fascinating reading, not least because, amidst the fallout following these findings, it clearly creates a precedent which, rightly or wrongly, would appear to place racing authorities and the current Rules Of Racing regarding matters of this nature in a very difficult position moving forward.

Chances are the fallout has only just begun!

More articles