C-72.1, r. 5 - Rules respecting Standardbred horse races held at an amateur race track

Full text
156. Any of the following situations constitutes a violation for which the racing judge must order a horse to be scratched:
(1)  a horse is unfit to start in the race because of its state of health or physical condition;
(2)  a horse is involved in an incident before the race;
(3)  the attestation referred to in section 123, the certificate and proof referred to in section 126 are not provided to the racing judge within the required time, unless the failure to do so is due to superior force;
(4)  the owner or trainer of a horse declared in a race fails to provide a declaration under oath or a document respecting the ownership of a horse when so requested by the racing judge;
(5)  a horse participating in a race is likely to cause an accident or injure another horse or a driver;
(6)  a horse participating in a race is unmanageable;
(7)  the same horse causes a second recall in a single race, unless it broke its gait because its equipment broke, it was interfered with or it was the victim of an accident;
(8)  a horse declared in a race does not have a specific trainer;
(9)  a drug, a medication or a mixture containing sodium bicarbonate has been administered to a horse within 24 hours preceding the race in which the horse is to start;
(10)  the results of the analysis of the blood sample taken under section 259 and 261 are positive;
(11)  the trainer of the horse, the trainer’s representative or the owner of the horse refuses to submit the horse to the blood sampling procedure described in section 259 or 261;
(12)  the horse taking part in a race is not in the paddock within the time prescribed in section 158.
The racing judge may order that a horse be scratched where it does not fulfil the conditions for participation in the race in which it is declared.
The racing judge must ensure that the public is informed that a horse has been scratched by announcing it over the public address system provided by the association.
Decision 96-07-24, s. 156.