CCJ asserts that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done

Fri Mar 01, 2013

– by Daniel Thompson,
Eugene Dupuch Law School

In deciding the application of the Barbados Turf Club, the CCJ emphasised that “Justice should not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”

On March 6, 2004, the Barbados Turf Club sponsored the Sandy Lane Gold Cup horse racing competition, which was won by Mr Eugene Melnyk’s horse. However, following testing after the race, the Horse Racing Forensic Laboratory (HRFL) informed the Turf Club that the sample taken from the horse “Kathir” had tested positive for a prohibited substance.{{more}}

A Disciplinary Committee held a hearing to investigate the lab’s report. During the hearing, the Turf Club’s attorney argued successfully that under the rules of the Turf Club, the horse’s trainer was the only person properly summoned and that Mr Melnyk, even as owner of the horse, had no standing and therefore was not allowed to participate in the hearing.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Disciplinary Committee upheld the finding from the HRFL that the horse had raced with a prohibited substance in its body, disqualified the horse, fined the trainer $500 and ordered the trainer to pay costs and reasonable expenses of the inquiry.

Mr Melnyk consequently brought an action in the High Court, challenging the decision of the Disciplinary Committee. The Court agreed that he had standing to bring the action in the High Court and it also found that the Disciplinary Committee’s inquiry was tainted with bias, in that the Turf Club’s lawyers had retired with the Disciplinary Board during their deliberations. As a result, the judge declared the decision of the Disciplinary Committee to be null and void and granted a permanent injunction, restraining the Turf Club from enforcing the decision of the Disciplinary Committee.

The Turf Club’s appeal to the Barbados Court of Appeal was dismissed, since that Court agreed with the findings of the trial judge that the principles of natural justice were breached by the Disciplinary Committee.

The Court of Appeal also refused to give the Turf Club leave to apply to the CCJ, and therefore they applied to the CCJ for special leave to appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal.

In dismissing the Turf Club’s application for special leave to appeal, the CCJ outlined that an application will be rejected if it “finds that the appeal has no realistic chance of success.”

The CCJ declared that no such chance existed and agreed with the Barbados Courts that Mr Melnyk did have standing and there was no real chance of arguing that the rules of natural justice had not been breached, since the Turf Club’s attorneys were allowed to mix with the Disciplinary Committee during their deliberations.

This summary is intended to assist the Caribbean public in learning more about the work of the CCJ. It is not a formal document of the Court. The judgment of the Court is the only authoritative document and may be found at

http://chooseavirb.com/ccj/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Judgment-Barbados-Turf-Club-v-Eugene-Melnyk-s-pg-21.pdf.