• Rules & procedures
    • Dispute types and process
    • Hearings and mediation
    • Rules of the Sports Tribunal
    • Costs
    • Legal assistance
    • Appeal a Tribunal decision
  • Decisions
    • All Decisions
    • Results
  • News
  • Resources
    • Guide to the Sports Tribunal
    • Sports Tribunal Annual Reports
    • Independent Reports
    • Links
    • Forms / Proceeding Forms
    • Transparency Statement
  • About us
    • About the Sports Tribunal
    • Members of the Tribunal
    • Registrar of the Sports Tribunal
    • History
    • FAQ
  • Contact

Decisions

Find the latest Tribunal decisions. You may also be interested in the Results of decisions.

Find Decisions

Latest decisions

217

cases

Expand all

Zac Quickenden v Canoe Racing New Zealand

03/15 · Decision 23 April 2015

Overview:

Appeal against decision of NSO - selection - jurisdiction - no jurisdiction as notice of appeal filed out of time

Reasons for Decision
PDF, 216 KB

Non anti-doping case · Canoeing · 1 May 2015

Wrestling New Zealand v Timothy Stewart

SDT 11/04 · Decision 21 October 2004

Overview:

In the matter of an anti-doping application

Media release
PDF, 67 KB
Decision
PDF, 162 KB

Anti-doping case · Wrestling · 21 October 2004

Wrestling New Zealand v Mark Hogarth

SDT 06/04 · Decision 30 August 2004

Overview:

In the matter of an anti-doping application

Decision
PDF, 102 KB
Media release
PDF, 29 KB

Anti-doping case · Wrestling · 30 August 2004

Wayne Gear v Table Tennis New Zealand

ST 11/10 · Decision 13 July 2010 · Reasons for Decision 15 July 2010

Overview:

Appeal against decision of an NSO - natural justice - table tennis coach G appealed his non-nomination by Table Tennis New Zealand as coach for Youth Olympic Games - Tribunal rejected argument that nomination of coach is not a selection decision for purposes of Tribunal Rules - TTNZ high performance... team panel consisting of 2 members drew up a long list of candidates for coaching position - long list included both panel members who drew up list but did not include G - they considered G for long list but for reasons relating to an earlier disciplinary matter on which G received a reprimand only, they did not include G on list - one of panel members was ultimately nominated by TTNZ as coach - G was unaware of procedures until after coach had been nominated. Principle of natural justice that person cannot be judge in their own cause - Tribunal took view on facts that the two panel members were judges in their own cause and therefore decision not to include G on the long list should be set aside on this ground - therefore unnecessary to make decision on other appeal grounds of bias as nomination decision set aside on the principle that a person cannot be a judge in their own cause - comments on whether apparent bias, as opposed to actual bias, would have been sufficient to overturn decision but this did not have to be decided - comments on other appeal grounds - Tribunal observed that usually no obligation to ask for expressions of interest and athlete or other candidate does not have right to make submissions on selection and unless express provisions in applicable rules, selector is not required to discuss potential selection with candidate or give reasons for non-selection after event - appeal allowed and nomination of coach by TTNZ set aside - nomination of coach referred back to TTNZ for determination in accordance with its selection criteria - Tribunal emphasised that in allowing the appeal it was not indicating any preference between G or coach TTNZ had nominated and noted that if TTNZ chose to re-nominate that coach, the Tribunal saw no reason why he should not be the coach.

Decision
PDF, 40 KB
Reasons for Decision
PDF, 101 KB
Media Release
PDF, 65 KB

Non anti-doping case · Table Tennis · 15 July 2010

Touch New Zealand v Willie Morunga

SDT 07/05 · Decision 4 August 2005

Overview:

Anti-doping – cannabis – recreational use – used cannabis at party two weeks before tournament - Mene / Koro principles applied – aggravating circumstances justifying suspension - defendant signed participation agreement with Touch NZ essentially agreeing not to use banned substances –defendant... had also previously been in teams where anti-doping violations had occurred (including with cannabis) – Tribunal considered defendant knew rules around anti-doping but chose to ignore them – two month’s ineligibility imposed.

Decision
PDF, 94 KB
Media release
PDF, 32 KB

Anti-doping case · Touch · 4 August 2005

Show more

  • FAQ
  • Contact us
  • © 2019 Sports Tribunal of New Zealand
  • •Privacy & Copyright