Kypros Kotzikas Case

What you never knew about the way racing is run

The NZTR Board and their CEO have a responsibility to make sure NZTR is complying with the law.

In many situations, what is lawful and what is unlawful is decided by case law.

On 11 August 2003, Justice Graeme Pankhurst delivered a High Court Judicial review decision which had implications for NZTR. The plaintiff was Kypros Kotzikas and the Canterbury branch of the New Zealand Standardbred Breeders Association .

Harness Racing New Zealand had imposed a $30 a year levy on 5,000 standardbred owners and breeders to stimulate membership of their Owners and Breeders Associations and to ensure their financial viability.

The Independent newspaper, reported the outcome as: “Justice Pankhurst ruled that HRNZ acted illegally …. to impose a compulsory $30 a year levy on …. owners … ”

If it was illegal for HRNZ to impose a levy on standardbred owners and pay the proceeds to the association representing standardbred owners then it follows that NZTR with its registration fee levy to raise money for the associations representing thoroughbred owners was also acting illegally.

Rule 405 (3) says, “The Board may, in its discretion and at any time and without assigning any reason therefor, reduce the prescribed fee and in such event such amount shall not thereafter by paid to the Federation.”

When I asked why NZTR had not stopped collecting the registration fee levy, which they could easily do under their Rules, I was told HRNZ were considering appealing the decision.

Surely the Directors on the NZTR Board should have moved smartly to stop collecting the levy when the High Court decision was released.

You can see for yourself that not only are the Rules not being complied with but also the Law as it stands. Great isn't it, the way these people work?

Justice Pankhurst ruled that HRNZ acted illegally …. to impose a compulsory $30 a year levy on …. owners …