In Part 1 of a continuing report, the Canadian Hall of Fame driver has asked the Ontario Horse Racing Appeal Panel to put a stay on his 10-year suspension and $40,000 fine while the appeals process plays out.

by Melissa Keith

On Friday (March 7), the Ontario Horse Racing Appeal Panel (HRAP) held a virtual hearing in which Canadian Hall of Fame driver Sylvain Filion made the case for a stay. He was appealing his 10-year suspension and $40,000 fine imposed by the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) on Oct. 31, 2024. Filion and trainer Richard Moreau were identically penalizedwhen former Woodbine Mohawk Park pacer Funtime Bayama (p, 3, 1:49.1s; $303,108) tested positive for darbepoetin (DPO) in out-of-competition testing on June 10, 2024.

HRAP chair Stanley Sadinsky stated that, “Mr. Filion was found to have been acting as an actual trainer of the horse, along with its trainer of record, Richard Moreau. Mr. Filion now seeks a stay of this ruling.” A stay would allow the 56-year-old driver to temporarily return to competition while he awaits his appeal hearing date, which had not been set as of March 13. Filion had served 127 days of his suspension as of the hearing date.

Filion was represented by Jennifer Friedman. Brendan van Niejenhuis and Alexandra Heine represented the registrar in the unusual hearing.

“I’ve sat on a lot of contested stay motions, but I’ve never seen so much material filed upon a motion for a stay,” said Sadinsky, reminding participants that Filion’s hearing was only to determine whether he met the criteria for a stay.

Four witnesses testified in the hearing: horseman Stephane Larocque; AGCO senior manager of racing Tyler Durand; Sylvain Filion’s wife Domenic Pare; and Filion himself. Two other racing officials, Brad Capes and Mike Weber, were sent summonses but did not attend due to mandatory training that made them unavailable.

“If at that [late afternoon] point in the evidence you’re not in a position to grant the appellant’s [Filion’s] request for a stay, then I would suggest we address the potential evidence of those two other individuals,” said Friedman, addressing Sadinsky.

Larocque was the first to be interviewed. He stated that he had been friends with Filion for “at least 20 years,” and had trained horses for Yves Filion, Sylvain’s father. Larocque had written a letter in defense of Sylvain, whom he called “a straight shooter” and a “one-of-a-kind” talent with horses. He testified that 10 to 15 different trainers used to regularly ask the now-suspended driver to take their horses for training miles or to jog.

“It was almost every day, because [Sylvain would] sometimes stop [in] to my barn and a lot of times he was gone to other barns… [because] everybody would like to have his opinion on a horse,” said Larocque. “A lot of them were clients who used to use him as a driver, and you know, the trainers wanted his opinion… because he’s so good at it.”

Friedman asked Larocque about what distinguishes a driver who goes training miles with horses from a de facto trainer.

“Well, they’re going to give their advice, but it’s the trainer’s decision to make the last call,” Larocque replied.

Larocque called Sylvain “a Guy Lafleur of harness racing,” referring to the Montreal Canadiens hockey legend. He defended the integrity of Sylvain’s 37-year driving career, adding, “To me, it’s very disrespectful for him, what’s happening right now.”

When questioned by Heine, the recently-retired trainer denied ever visiting Moreau’s farm to train or watch Funtime Bayama with Sylvain, or ever being involved in discussions with Sylvain, Moreau and/or a veterinarian about “racing strategy” for the gelding.

Durand was the next witness. He stated that in his position as AGCO senior manager of racing, he oversees the manager of the Equine Drug Unit, who in turn supervises the inspectors involved in the Funtime Bayama case. Van Niejenhuis asked Durand “whether an investigation was happening between [June and October, 2024] relating to Mr. Filion.”

Durand replied, “Not initially. Initially the investigation or inspection was focused around Mr. Moreau, however, during the course of which Mr. Filion became involved… Information was gathered through the course of the inspection that led us to believe that Mr. Filion was acting as the de facto trainer of the horse Funtime Bayama.”

Friedman next questioned Durand about whether he would agree that Sylvain was facing “aggressive… regulatory action, when there’s no hearing available or a suspension is levied,” which she added was “at the heart of why a stay ought to be granted.”

Durand disagreed.

“Mr. Filion had an opportunity to explain to us during the course of the inspection his side of the events, and that is what formed the basis of the Deputy Registrar’s decision,” he said.

“Are you aware that the appellant [Sylvain] made multiple informal stay requests virtually since the time the ruling was issued?” asked Friedman.

“Yes,” said Durand.

Friedman argued that Filion had suffered reputational damage from widespread reports of the allegations against him.

“In terms of the ruling itself, particularly one of this nature where there’s a positive test, you’d agree that this kind of news travels fast in industries such as the horse racing industry… and that often participants and the public will jump to the conclusion that a positive test means someone cheated?” she asked. Durand agreed. 

“Are you aware that [Sylvain] was recently inducted into the Canadian Horse Racing Hall of Fame?” asked Friedman.

“Yes,” replied Durand.

“Are you also aware that the AGCO required him to be interviewed for this matter on the very same day of his induction?” continued Friedman. “Is that troubling to you at all?”

Durand said, “I don’t know if that was intentional. I don’t believe that it was, but that is unfortunate timing.”

Multiple racing and mainstream news articles were displayed on screen, showing headlines about Sylvain’s suspension. Friedman asked and Durand agreed that “this news traveled around virtually everywhere before Sylvain Filion had an opportunity to defend himself.”

She noted that the four-time O’Brien Driver of the Year and 1999 World Driving Champion had a previously “clean record” free of serious conduct or medication violations, suggesting this was “a basis for granting a stay.”

When Friedman asked Durand whether he agreed that granting a stay would allow Sylvain “damage control… for his reputation” and a chance to earn an income from driving again, he said he was unsure.

Durand countered that Sylvain’s history did not outweigh the current charges against him.

“The AGCO’s position is that this is an extremely serious offence, and it would be viewed upon the industry negatively to consent to a stay and allow him to participate when we believe the offence was so egregious that he should not be participating,” he said.

Friedman drew attention to the “novelty” of the accusations against Sylvain.

“How many times has the AGCO held a driver responsible as trainer of record?” she asked Durand, who responded that he was not aware of any in recent years.

She next questioned Durand about Sylvain’s “chance to defend himself” before the AGCO ruling against him. The senior manager of racing replied that the driver “did have the opportunity to tell us, but he was not presented with what the violation was against him, prior to the ruling being issued.”

Friedman argued that Sylvain did not know which AGCO judge or judges ruled against him, which Durand agreed the driver was “entitled to know.”

The integrity of Funtime Bayama’s out-of-competition blood sample was raised by Friedman. Durand said the sample was first analyzed in British Columbia by Bureau Veritas, and later by LGC in the United Kingdom, to confirm the analysis.

“The samples were still in their locked container and sealed and arrived just as the lab had shipped them there, but it was not placed in an evidence bag” for shipping to LGC, he said.

Missing documentation and an outstanding residue test on the sample, requested by the counsel representing trainer Moreau, constitute a basis for allowing Sylvain a stay, argued Friedman. She later questioned Durand on whether letters of support for Sylvain’s return to racing could help “restore his reputation.”

Durand said, “He could attempt to do so.”

When questioned by van Niejenhuis about whether Sylvain’s 2024 Hall of Fame induction and accomplishments matter in deciding whether to grant a stay, Durand replied they did not. He also told van Niejenhuis that he was unaware of anything preventing Sylvain from attempting to restore his own reputation.

Sylvain’s counsel next called Pare to testify. Pare said the couple had been together since high school, and that Sylvain had always earned a living in harness racing. She supported Larocque’s earlier statements that Sylvain was a professional catch driver who frequently trained horses, in the sense of taking them for training miles.

“I live with Sylvain for the last 34 years,” said Pare. “Every single morning, he will go and exercise horses at training facilities, farm facilities, whoever calls or texts him, ‘Hey Sylvain, I need your input about that horse. Can you come and exercise the horse?’”

After Pare’s testimony, Sylvain spoke extensively about his ongoing suspension and hopes for the future. This will be covered in the next edition of this column.

At publication deadline (March 13), the HRAP had made no ruling on Sylvain’s application for a stay and no appeal hearing dates were set for Sylvain or Moreau.