Racing NSW's barrister Oliver Jones requested that the Court temporarily stay proceedings so his client could consider whether to appeal the Supreme Court decision that ruled the regulator acted beyond its powers in attempting to force the Australian Turf Club into administration.
Justice François Kunc declared the proposed appointment of an administrator "invalid and of no effect," concluding the regulator's decision was not authorised under the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996, and ordered Racing NSW to pay the ATC's legal costs. The ruling, delivered on Wednesday, cuts to the core of institutional accountability in NSW racing governance.
The case hinged on the scope of Racing NSW's regulatory mandate. Justice Kunc found that the regulator's concerns about the club's financial position and corporate governance fell outside its function to "control, supervise and regulate in New South Wales the racing of galloping horses," rendering the decision invalid. The Court also found that even if the Act had authorised the appointment, the decision would still have been invalid because it relied on a material misreading of accounting information provided by the ATC, amounting to a jurisdictional error.
Racing NSW insists the authority to intervene in club affairs remains necessary. Justice Kunc's remarks laid bare the uncertainty and blurred boundaries within the 30-year-old Act, and the ruling carries implications far beyond the ATC, giving every race club in New South Wales a clearer understanding of where Racing NSW's powers end. The regulator argues that when a club's financial instability threatens racing operations or participant incomes, regulatory intervention becomes unavoidable.
The opposing view is equally compelling. Justice Kunc noted the dispute may not end the tensions between the two organisations but emphasised that Racing NSW's power to appoint an administrator is a drastic one which can have a very real impact on hundreds, if not thousands, of people. The ATC's position is that a member-owned club, governed through a board accountable to its membership, occupies different constitutional terrain than a commercial entity, and statutory intervention should be narrowly confined to racing-specific matters.
Following the ruling, industry figures have called on the Racing Minister and the state government to commit to acting on Brad Hazzard's independent review of the Thoroughbred Racing Act before the 2027 state election. The governance framework itself now faces scrutiny at the highest level of government.
Both parties remain in conflict over ancillary matters. Both parties will return to court in two weeks to address whether Racing NSW has the power to demand information from the club about its hospitality revenue. That continuing legal battle underscores a broader institutional reality: whilst courts can draw lines on paper, the practical relationship between regulators and regulated entities requires more than judicial pronouncements to mend.