What Is the Horse Racing Appeal Panel in Ontario and How Does It Work?

Sara Santos-Vigneault
Nov 10
3 min read

Written by: Sara Santos-Vigneault

Date: November 10, 2025

Two jockeys race horses on a dirt track surrounded by greenery. One wears red and pink, the other green and black. Dust trails behind.

How the Horse Racing Appeal Panel (HRAP) Works in Ontario

The Horse Racing Appeal Panel (HRAP) is Ontario's independent adjudicative body responsible for resolving disputes in the horse racing industry. Before the HRAP's creation in 2016, appeals in the horse racing sector were handled through internal AGCO mechanisms or older tribunals, often criticized for lack of independence and transparency. Established under Section 7 of the Horse Racing Licence Act, 2015 [1], it operates separately from the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO), providing a fair and transparent forum for racing professionals to appeal regulatory decisions.

Legal Authority and Governance

The HRAP was created as part of Ontario's regulatory reforms in 2016, following public and industry concerns about the need for a more transparent and impartial system of resolving disputes. These reforms aimed to modernize oversight in the racing industry and restore confidence in its regulatory framework..

The Horse Racing Appeal Panel hears appeals from decisions made under the Rules of Racing by stewards, judges, veterinarians, and other racing officials.

It operates under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act (SPPA) [2], which ensures that administrative proceedings are conducted with fairness, transparency, and adherence to legal standards.

The HRAP has the statutory power to:

Confirm the decision
Vary (modify) the decision
Set aside the decision entirely

Who Can Appeal to the HRAP?

Anyone directly affected by a racing decision can initiate an appeal, including:

Trainers
Drivers
Owners
Grooms
Jockeys

In limited circumstances, the Panel may allow additional participants to join an appeal. Under Standardbred Rule 24.01 [3], the Notice of Appeal must be filed within a reasonable time following the original ruling.

To initiate an appeal, use the official form [4]: https://www.hrappealpanel.ca/en/forms-resources

Representation Before the Panel

Participants can:

Represent themselves
Retain a licensed lawyer or paralegal
Use a representative from a horsepersons' association (e.g., Ontario Harness Horse Association)

A Declaration of Representative form must be submitted in advance of the hearing [4].

How Evidence Is Shared

Before the hearing, both parties must:

Exchange documents
Share witness statements
Submit expert reports (if applicable)

Evidence is shared directly between the parties and is not filed with the HRAP unless specifically requested. The Panel prepares an official Appeal Book containing the core documents for the hearing [5].

HRAP Hearing Structure

Hearings follow an adversarial format where each party presents its case. The Panel may intervene with questions to clarify factual or legal issues. Most hearings are conducted virtually via Zoom, but in-person hearings may be ordered at the Panel's discretion [6].

In-person hearings are held at: 10 Carlson Court, Toronto.

Hearings are generally open to the public, except in cases requiring privacy. For example, the Panel may close a hearing if sensitive personal information is involved or if the protection of vulnerable individuals is necessary.

Jockey on a brown horse with red saddle gallops on a racetrack. Lush green hedges line the track under a cloudy sky, evoking excitement. — Photo by Jose Ricardo Barraza Morachis

Pre-Hearing Conferences and Motions

The HRAP may hold pre-hearing conferences to:

Establish timelines and case deadlines
Clarify legal or factual issues
Resolve procedural concerns

Parties may also file motions to:

Request a stay of the decision
Ask for an adjournment
Seek a procedural order
Obtain clarification on procedural matters

All requests must be made in writing using official HRAP forms [4].

Illustrative Case: Bourgault v. Registrar, 2021 CanLII 50765 (ON HRAP)

This case illustrates how HRAP functions in practice.

Trainer Frederick Bourgault was sanctioned in 2020 for striking a horse, resulting in a 45-day suspension, $2,500 fine, and one-year probation. Bourgault appealed the decision.

The HRAP conducted a six-day de novo hearing, heard multiple eyewitness testimonies, and found the Registrar had proven the case on a balance of probabilities. The Panel upheld the original penalties and extended probation to two years, citing the seriousness of the misconduct [7].

Full decision: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrap/doc/2021/2021canlii50765/2021canlii50765.html.

The Panel applied a balance of probabilities standard and emphasized the importance of animal welfare in racing. It found the eyewitness evidence credible and the sanction proportional to the conduct.

Final Decisions and Judicial Review

HRAP decisions are final within the tribunal framework. However, an application for judicial review may be brought before the Divisional Court of Ontario if:

The process was procedurally unfair
The Panel exceeded its jurisdiction
A legal error occurred

Judicial review must be initiated within the timelines set by the court. In Ontario, the general limitation period for bringing a judicial review application is 30 days from the date of the decision, although extensions may be granted in limited circumstances. Legal advice is strongly recommended.. Legal assistance is strongly recommended [8].