Statement Regarding Allegations made on 2UE

Australian Canoeing today denied comments made on Sydney radio yesterday (eds: 2UE, Steve Price) that it had been involved in inquiries into the assets of one of their elite athletes as a result of a hearing by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The allegations stem from a successful defence by Australian Canoeing against an appeal by Shelly Oates-Wilding over her non-inclusion in the national team to contest the Olympic qualification regatta.

Initially, the appeal was dealt with internally, by Australian Canoeing.

Revision of the Olympic selection appeals process undertaken by the Australian Olympic Committee following the 2000 Olympic Games was to ensure that unnecessary costs were not incurred at the initial appeals tribunal and that athletes could seek a comparatively cost and time effective review of a selection decision. The internal appeals process excludes lawyers to keep the costs low at this first stage. Australian Canoeing has not sought any costs for this internal appeal.

The Australian Canoeing Board appointed an independent Appeals Tribunal in accordance with the Appeals process adopted by all Olympic sports to hear the internal appeals. The appeals of Shelly-Oates Wilding and Scott Austin were dismissed.

As was their right, both Shelly Oates-Wilding and Scott Austin then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. These appeals were dismissed

The decision and reasons of Australian Canoeing Selection Appeals Tribunal in this appeal were very clear and the Court of Arbitration for Sport Award confirmed that a further appeal should not have been taken.

Submissions regarding costs have been invited by the Court of Arbitration for Sport and it has been directed that they be submitted by this Friday. Australian Canoeing will be making a submission for costs. Other athletes that were involved in the hearing can also make submissions for costs.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport code very clearly states: 'As a general rule, the Court of Arbitration for Sport award shall grant the prevailing party a contribution towards its legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with the proceedings. When granting such contribution, the Panel shall take into account the outcome of the proceedings, as well as the conduct and the financial resources of the parties.'

Australian Canoeing has been put to significant cost in responding to Shelly Oates-Wilding's and Scott Austin's appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport after they had received a full and fair hearing before Australian Canoeing Selection Appeals Tribunal.

Australian Canoeing denies being involved in any way in any inquiries into the assets of Shelly Oates-Wilding as she claimed on 2UE - in particular as claimed by Steve Price.

Australian Canoeing has not and has no knowledge of photographs being taken of Shelly Oates-Wilding's assets. Australian Canoeing is not paying nor using any investigators to make enquiries into Ms Oates-Wilding's assets.

Shelly Oates-Wilding also claimed that Australian Canoeing could have accessed free legal advice.

Australian Canoeing was advised by the Barrister representing Ms Oates-Wilding that the New South Wales Bar Association and the AOC maintain a list of experienced sports lawyers prepared to assist in appearing in these matters without fees in the interests of assisting athletes and sporting bodies to resolve disputes.

Australian Canoeing did investigate this and was advised by both bodies that no such list existed.

Australian Canoeing was not able to find suitable free legal representation in the time available.

Both Shelly Oates-Wilding and Scott Austin chose to have lawyers and barristers representing them.

Media Enquiries: Jon Bisset 02 9552 4500