The AR 178D certification procedure for laboratory analysis of samples is a facilitative 'short-cut' to proof and does not exclude conventional methods of proving the detection of a prohibited substance. Non-compliance with AR 178D does not render inadmissible other evidence independently establishing the presence of a prohibited substance. The majority (McLeish JA and Cavanough AJA) held that 'causes to be administered' in AR 175(h) requires proof that the person authorised, directed or exerted control over the administration, contemplating that the substance would be administered, but does not require knowledge of the identity of the substance. On the unchallenged findings that the trainers had no awareness of the veterinarian's secret addition of cobalt, causation was not established. AR 178DD permits storage and later retesting of samples with no implied reasonable time limit.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.