APPEAL – COLOUR HOLDER AND STABLE EMPLOYEE MR MARK SHAM

  • Bob Brogan
  • Bob Brogan's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
9 months 3 weeks ago #814670 by Bob Brogan
APPEAL – COLOUR HOLDER AND STABLE EMPLOYEE MR MARK SHAM

The National Horseracing Authority confirms that an Appeal against the finding and the penalty imposed by an Inquiry Board upon Colour Holder and Stable Employee Mr Mark Sham, was heard on 12 March 2021.

Background
At an Inquiry held in Johannesburg on 11 February 2020, Mr Mark Sham was charged with a contravention of Rules 72.1.25 and 72.1.26.

The particulars being that he conducted himself in an improper manner on racecourse property, which might have had the effect of discrediting horseracing and which did or might have brought into disrepute the good name of the National Horseracing Authority on 15 January 2020 at the 138th Annual General Meeting held at its offices at Turffontein Racecourse.

Mr Sham pleaded not guilty to the charge, but was found guilty of the charge. The Board after considering the evidence led, and taking into account the arguments in aggravation and mitigation, ruled that Mr Sham be fined the sum of thirty thousand rand (R30 000) of which fifteen thousand rand (R15 000) is suspended for a period of twenty-four months, provided that Mr Sham is not found guilty of a similar offence under these Rules during this period.

The Appeal Board, after having heard the submissions put forward in this matter, both on behalf of the Appellant and on behalf of the Respondent, ruled:

1. that Mr Sham’s behaviour at the AGM amounted to misbehaviour and/or improper conduct and his appeal against this finding was dismissed;

2. that there was no indication that Mr Sham’s conduct had the effect of discrediting horseracing or bringing the good name of the NHA into disrepute. Accordingly, his appeal against this finding was upheld;

3. that in the circumstances, the penalty imposed by the Inquiry Board was set aside. The Appeal Board substituted a penalty in an amount of R15 000;

4. that the appeal was at least partially successful and accordingly, in terms of Rule 85.5.8, the prescribed Appeal fee lodged by the Applicant, should be refunded.

......................................................................................................................................

www.africanbettingclan.com

@SAFBETTINGCLAN

FACEBOOK

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Felix
  • Felix's Avatar
  • Away
  • Premium Member
  • Premium Member
More
9 months 3 weeks ago - 9 months 3 weeks ago #814672 by Felix
I feel for you Mark,I would have given him a snot klap instead.

I hope the refund included the interest that accrued on the deposit .
Last edit: 9 months 3 weeks ago by Felix. Reason: .

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 day 13 hours ago #833500 by Sylvester
(Owner) - Rule 72.1.25 and 72.1.26 - In that he conducted himself in
an improper manner on racecourse property and brought horse racing
into disrepute by engaging in an altercation with security and various
stakeholders, taking alcohol into the parade ring, removing his shirt
and taking up a position on the Racecourse to postpone the
continuation of the race meeting. Fined R10 000 and colours
cancelled, which cancellation is wholly suspended for a period of five
years, on condition that he is not found guilty of either of the above
rules during this period

How is this incident less serious than the Sham incident. NHRA pass shelf life. Time for new brooms and consistent penalties.
Joke Moodley bitches in the media about chipping away at the rules. When him and his predecessor suggested rules are guidelines.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.314 seconds