COMMANDING CASE Decision Reserved In Owner’s Appeal

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29932, 20 September 1962, Page 14

COMMANDING CASE Decision Reserved In Owner’s Appeal

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, September 19.

Decision was reserved today by Mr Justice Leicester in the Supreme Court, at Wellington, in the action in which George Scott Walton, a farmer, of Otaki, has sought a declaration that a decision by the racing appeal judges disqualifying the racehorse, Commanding, after it won the Wellington Guineas in October, 1961, was invalid and void.

The defendants were W. S. Holland, a solicitor, of Tauranga, P. G. Vercoe, a company manager, of Hamilton, and A. McNab, a farmer, of Wanganui.

Mr Blundell, reviewing th evidence which had been bt fore the Wellington Distrk Committee, said that in hi statement Walton said th: Commanding raced at a mee mg at Trantham on Septent ber 23 and was stiff the ne> day He said he thought was the shoulder again an decided to give another cours of Bl tablets Commanding’s jockey ha said that on the Friday ever ing before going to Trenthai he, himself, had decided t give Commanding an injectio of Bl to see whether it woul "square the horse up.” H did not mention to anyon that he gave the injectioi He did not think it woul "show up.” He knew he wt doing wrong, but he did n< think he was “doing han in another way ” Mr Blundell said the cu cumstance was that of jockey being of the belie if what he said was correc that the injection might d the horse some good Th evidence showed he was jockey of some experience “It is pertinent to say, ho' did he come to know that th might relieve this sore shou der condition?" said Mr Blur dell “He learned it somi where, presumably in the e> perience he has had in th racing world, either here c in Australia” His Honour: The fact th: the jockey thought that th administration of this dru might improve the stamin of the horse for a particuk race, whereas scientifically was proved it would no would go to the purpose c intention, and not to th question of rule 103. primal ily at all events

Mr Blundell: It merely links up that, in respect to this particular horse, there was this history from the time it was in Australia onwards of suffering from a stiff shoulder. of Bl being given to alleviate that condition and. in particular, the trainer saying it was beneficial English Report

Mr Blundell submitted that the appeal judges’ decision was fortified by the Duke of Norfolk’s report. The report described the difficulty which had been experienced in obtaining some general formula or definition of doping. AU the parties, including the

British Veterinary Association, which were involved in the discussion had agreed that doping was defined as the administration to a horse before a race of anything which might alter its speed, stamina, courage of conduct in the race. The sub-committee of the British Veterinary Association did not see any objection to the use of vitamins like Bl provided they were given at normal therapeutic levels to a horse in training, either to enable it to maintain growth or development or to assist in convalescing during minor winter ailments. The view of the sub-com-mittee was that if used in excessive doses the vitamins might alter a horse’s speed, courage or conduct in a race, and should be looked upon as doping. The committee examined all phases of doping and by request had dealt with a specific question relating to vitamins. His Honour: Are you saying that if yoc have a drug permitted for dietary deficiency purposes, but in respect of which there seems doubt as to whether or not in massive doses it may alter the horses’s speed, stamina, etc., that would Taring the user within the rules? Mr Blundell: Yes. I do contend that His Honour: What you really say in essence is that there is no question of construction of the rule arising at all in this case It is simply a question of whether there was evidence which justified the judges reversing the opinion of the district committee? Mr Blundell: That, in a simple form, is my submission. Mr Blundell said counsel for Walton had said there was "evidence both ways.” evidence capable of an opinion one way or the other. It would thus appear that if the district committee had come to the opposite conclusion to the one it had reached, it could not have been argued successfully that there was no evidence entitling it to do so. His Honour said the case was not without its difficulties and he could not promise an early decision.