find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Insurance Lawyer (3-5 PAE)
Category: Insurance and Superannuation Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Dynamic organisation ·
View details
Legal Counsel
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: North Sydney NSW 2060
· 18 month fixed term contract · 3-5 years PQE with TMT exposure
View details
Olympic selection a legal minefield

Olympic selection a legal minefield

IAN THORPE’S dramatic ‘fall’ was the backdrop of a recent seminar conducted by the College of Law in Sydney to address Olympic selection within the framework of sports law.A panel comprising…

IAN THORPE’S dramatic ‘fall’ was the backdrop of a recent seminar conducted by the College of Law in Sydney to address Olympic selection within the framework of sports law.

A panel comprising representatives from various Olympic sports, and John de Mestre & Co solicitor John de Mestre, discussed the recent events surrounding swimmer Ian Thorpe. As well, the options open to athletes who felt cheated by the selection process were analysed, as were measures to avoid legal proceedings for future Olympic committees and athletes.

John de Mestre & Co have been involved with numerous legal proceedings surrounding the Olympic selection process. De Mestre said the firm had acted on behalf of a number of athletes in the past “who felt cheated by the selection process and wanted to appeal the decision”.

In an interview with Lawyers Weekly, de Mestre said the seminar went well. “I summarised what the selection process was and what an athlete could do if they felt they were unfairly treated,” he said.

Also at the seminar was a lawyer who had been a chairperson of a triathlon selection committee. “She had done some work after the last Olympics because there was some dissatisfaction about that,” de Mestre said.

At the last Olympics, “teams for the Sydney Olympics were announced and around 42 appeals were made. Every appeal is very time consuming and can be costly as well as emotionally draining for the athlete”. At the seminar de Mestre said he made suggestions on how the number of appeals could be reduced in future.

The seminar heard that the less discretion allowed and the more “clear cut” the selection the better, de Mestre said. “Everyone agreed that athletes being told why they weren’t selected for the team was essential.”

There were some situations in Olympic selection, de Mestre said, where someone could be the best person objectively, but not necessarily subjectively, such as with rowing. Someone might fit in better with the team, for example, or other external factors might need to be considered. This needed to be explained to athletes, he said.

During the seminar de Mestre explained the different selection processes that applied to different Olympic sports, as well as the challenges that faced athletes and their coaches. He also raised issues relating to contractual obligations in sport.

An open discussion followed a formal session, at which time sports representatives were welcomed to share their knowledge and experiences of the selection process.

Ian Thorpe’s recent disqualification was raised in the discussion. De Mestre said this event had not happened when the seminar was thought of, and just happened to tie in well with it. He said it was discussed that, hypothetically, Thorpe may have had grounds for appeal. If he had fallen backwards, de Mestre said, “he would not have [been] deemed to have started as he was. It was arguable Thorpe didn’t start, de Mestre said. “He could appeal because he was denied the ability to compete in the selection race.”

“There was lively conversation both ways, but the consensus was that it was arguable. The question was: Did he break the rules or not? On balance, everyone agreed it was arguable,” de Mestre said.

Minter Ellison partner David Garnsey told Lawyers Weekly that, regarding Olympic selection, “the moment you introduce discretion you open the door for subjective opinion. But if you don’t allow some subjectivity, then you get the Ian Thorpe situation where someone misses out”.

“It’s a very difficult situation for athletic bodies, which is why so many go to the swimming-type selection process. It is very hard to appeal against this sort of thing, but it does provide heart breaking situations,” Garnsey said.

The line that many sports organisations like to take, Garnsey said, is to make it a strict criteria regime that leaves no doubt. “But if someone is unwell on a day, or not performing their best, this is not considered.”

For athletes, Garnsey said, the Olympics can be a full time occupation. “Being part of a team and appearing on the world stage can mean a lot. It means a lot to make it. There is a lot of advertising and sponsorship involved.

“Olympic selection is a minefield for sporting associations, but good for lawyers,” Garnsey said. The skill is in drafting criteria that are less “attackable”, he said.

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Olympic selection a legal minefield
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
LCA president Fiona McLeod SC
Aug 17 2017
Where social fault lines meet the justice gap in Aus
After just returning from a tour of the Northern Territory, LCA president Fiona McLeod SC speaks wit...
Marriage equality flag
Aug 17 2017
ALHR backs High Court challenge to marriage equality postal vote
Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR) has voiced its support for a constitutional challenge to ...
Give advice
Aug 17 2017
A-G issues advice on judiciary’s public presence
Commonwealth Attorney-General George Brandis QC has offered his advice on the public presence of jud...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...