Share to
The Appeals Body, Mr Justice Frank Clarke (Chairman), Mr Anthony Byrne and Mr Nick Wachman convened at the Offices of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board on Thursday, 24 September 2026 to consider the appeal of Patrick Harnett (Rider) against the decision of the Raceday Stewards at Clonmel on 16 September 2026.
On the day following the running of the Suir Blueway Handicap, the Raceday Stewards found Mr Harnett, rider of Ochtar Againn in breach of Rule 214 in that he had ridden improperly and having considered his record in this regard (second offence), the Raceday Stewards suspended him for nine racedays.
The grounds of the appeal lodged by Mr Harnett was that the Raceday Stewards erred in their decision.
At the appeal hearing evidence was heard from Mr Harnett and Chris Hayes, Rider. The Appeals Body also watched a recording of the race.
In his evidence, Mr Harnett outlined how he had made the running throughout the race and when he noticed Shane Foley, rider of Mare Crisium travelling on his inside it was his intention to move in and race upsides for the closing stages. Mr Harnett stated he did not intend to make any contact and he took corrective action as soon as there was a bump. Mr Harnett added that he feels his saddle may have slipped slightly in the closing stages and added that his mount was wearing cheekpieces for the first time which may have contributed to him drifting onto Mr Foley’s mount.
In his evidence, Mr Hayes described the characteristics of the track and stated that it is likely Mr Harnett did not feel his saddle slip at the time due to the undulations of the track. Mr Hayes said that, in his opinion, Mr Harnett’s saddle slipping completely unbalanced him and the filly and the incident was the result of a number of contributing factors.
Having considered the evidence and submissions Justice Frank Clarke delivered the following decision on behalf of the Appeals Body.
“Essentially the test which the panel has to apply, is whether this is dangerous riding in other circumstances and there are two legs to that. The first being under Rule 214(iv)(a) purposeful interference and 214(iv)(b) riding in a manner which is so far below that of a competent and careful rider. Firstly, on the evidence the panel is not satisfied this was a deliberate act on the part of Mr Harnett. The real question is to whether the interference, which was undoubtedly caused, arose out of riding that was that far below that of a careful and competent rider. There is no doubt that there was a sustained period of interference and the panel is also mindful of the point made by Ms Smullen which is that at the time the incident began to develop there was not much between the lines of the two horses so no need to move in which Mr Harnett described. However, the panel is not satisfied that the threshold set out in 214(iv)(b), that of being so far below that of a careful and competent rider being met, although the panel is of the view that that while this was careless riding it was of the severe end of careless rather than improper riding. Therefore, we allow the appeal in part and impose a suspension of six days for a breach of careless riding.”
The case was presented by Mr Patrick Kennedy, Patrick J O’Meara Solicitors on behalf of Mr Harnett. The IHRB was represented by Ms Hannah Smullen BL, instructed by Ms Christine Traynor, IHRB Head of Racing Regulation and Integrity.
Suspension Dates: 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 October