Bookmaker Brian Graham is taking legal action against State body, Horse Racing Ireland (HRI), in a row over the rules governing racecourse betting pitches.
Mr Graham says that regulations introduced in 2016 dealing with the allocation of potentially lucrative premium betting pitches at Irish racecourses disadvantage longstanding on-course bookmakers.
The High Court this week granted him leave to apply for a judicial review of the rule change and barred HRI from implementing it pending the outcome of Mr Graham's application, which is due on March 28th.
The rule about which he is complaining came into force last March. It allocates temporary premium betting pitches on a rotating basis, rather than giving first refusal to longstanding senior pitch-holders, which is the practice with other racecourse betting locations.
The Irish National Professional Bookmakers’ Association (INPBA) and the Association of Irish Racecourses (AIR) determine the rules allocating betting pitches and HRI administers them.
Senior bookmakers, who have bought pitches and paid to operate them over long periods of years, get first refusal on the better locations within the ring that potentially offer the best return.
High turnover
Premium pitches are located outside the betting ring at crowded locations within racecourses, such as grandstand bars or the prerace parade ring, that have the potential to generate high turnover. Racecourses do not make them available at every meeting.
As they are allocated by rotation, rather than seniority: once a bookmaker spends a race day working at a premium pitch, they go to the end of the queue until their turn comes around again.
Mr Graham appealed the rule last December to HRI’s pitch tribunal, whose members represent the State body, AIR and the INPBA, but this ruled against him, prompting him to go to court this week.
The bookmaker, whose father Seán Graham established the combined high street and on-course betting chain, argued that setting aside the seniority rule for premium pitch allocation erodes the business’s rights and the value of its investment.
“We are looking for HRI to implement the rules fairly and impartially, and to recognise the long-established seniority rights which my family have acquired over the years,” he said.
“Rules were changed in the course of last year in a way which we contend was not transparent and did not facilitate proper engagement.
“”I pursued the matter within HRI and I believe very strongly that the pitch tribunal process was flawed on many levels. That argument has now been acknowledged by the court.”
The High Court suspended the March 2016 rule as well as giving Mr Graham the go ahead to seek to a judicial review of the regulation.
HRI said that it was studying the court’s ruling but believed that it was a matter for the racecourses and the INPBA.
