Australian Olympic rider Heath Ryan has been issued an 18-month suspension by an FEI Tribunal — backdated to June 12, 2025, which means the suspension will end on December 12 of this year — following a decision on a horse abuse case that originated on social media in June of 2025. The video, which was found to be from May of 2023, depicted Heath hitting a horse named Nico more than 50 times. In the wake of the video being posted online, Heath initially issued a statement on his own social media, describing the horse as one that had seriously injured his owner and was on the path to euthanasia. He also stated that the video had been published by a disgruntled ex-employee.
“The FEI Tribunal concluded that Ryan engaged in horse abuse pursuant to Article 142.1 of the FEI General Regulations, bringing both the FEI and equestrian sport into disrepute,” a statement issued by the FEI on August 28 says. “He has furthermore breached the FEI Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse pursuant to Article 164.12(i) of the FEI General Regulations. In its Final Decision, the FEI Tribunal suspends Ryan for a period of eighteen (18) months, starting as of the date of the Provisional Suspension imposed on him on 12 June 2025. Consequently, his suspension will end on 12 December 2026. Ryan is also ordered to pay a fine of CHF 3,000 and a contribution of CHF 3,000 towards the FEI’s legal costs.”
The decision comes after months of investigation and procedural elements, which include an attempt by Heath and his legal team to file with Australian national courts to halt the FEI Tribunal’s proceedings via an Australian court injunction, arguing the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to discipline him. He contended the FEI lacked jurisdiction because the session was private, involved a non-FEI-registered horse, and wasn’t tied to any FEI event — an argument the Tribunal itself rejected in its jurisdictional ruling. He separately sought injunctive relief in Australian courts, including on the question of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, though the specific grounds argued there aren’t detailed in the tribunal’s decision.
In his team’s arguments to the FEI Tribunal, Heath said that he used FEI-recognized Equitation Science principles (negative reinforcement with escalation), that the horse was in “conflict behaviour” rather than a fear state, and that the horse’s later successful rehoming proved the method worked.
His defense leaned heavily on training science, not just the horse’s history. He argued he had applied recognized Equitation Science principles — specifically negative reinforcement with progressive escalation of pressure, a widely used method in which pressure is released the moment a horse gives the correct response. He maintained the horse was displaying “conflict behavior” (resistance, kicking out, tail-swishing) rather than a genuine fear response, and pointed to the horse’s outcome — successfully re-homed and ridden without incident since — as proof the method had worked.
It’s a defense that borrows real, recognized terminology from an actual scientific framework. But that same body of research contains warnings that cut the other way. Equitation scientists have long cautioned that negative reinforcement only works ethically with precise timing: pressure has to stop the instant a horse responds, or it stops functioning as training and becomes de facto punishment. Researchers have also warned that what looks like a “successful” outcome — a horse that eventually stops resisting — can actually reflect learned helplessness, not genuine compliance, when an animal is subjected to sustained or inescapable pressure.
This is close to the argument the FEI’s own expert made. Equine veterinarian Dr. Rachel Murray concluded in her report that the whip strikes were delivered continuously and “without allowing the Horse time to respond,” finding the technique had “no rational training value” under recognized learning theory. The FEI’s claim went further, arguing that “obedience obtained through abuse is not a success but reflects the prioritisation of the Horse’s use over its welfare” — a framing that echoes, almost precisely, the same caution found in the equitation-science literature Heath cited in his own defense.
There is no confirmation in the decision documents (which can be read in full here) that the individual who submitted/posted the video was interviewed by the FEI or the FEI Tribunal. Heath, along with some of the nine witnesses who provided character statements in his defense, maintained that the video was submitted with a vindictive intention. A third party, Quest Global, confirmed that no evidence of editing or other manipulation of the video was found.
