Quirke v Bord Lúthchleas na hÉireann

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Justice Barr
• Judgment Date: 25 March 1988
• Neutral Citation: 1988 WJSC-HC 1650
• Docket Number: 336JR/87,[1987 No. 336 J.R.]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 25 March 1988

QUIRKE v. BORD LUTHCHLEAS NA HEIREANN

(JUDICIAL REVIEW)

PAUL QUIRKE

APPLICANT

AND

BORD LUTHCHLEAS NA hEIREANN

RESPONDENT

1988 WJSC-HC 1650

336JR/87

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

NATURAL JUSTICE

Fair procedures

Tribunal - Amateur athletics - Control - Drug Test - Failure of applicant athlete to attend for test - Suspension of applicant from participation in athletic events - The respondents were a national body which was responsible for the development, promotion, control and management of amateur athletics within the State - They were affiliated to the International Amateur Athletics Federation, which controls international amateur athletics, and were bound by the rules and regulations of the international body - The applicant was a contestant at a national championship meeting held by the respondents at Tullamore on 25- 26/7/87 - At the conclusion of his event on the first day, the respondents requested the applicant to submit to a drug test at their drug control centre and to furnish a sample of his urine for that purpose - The applicant agreed but was unable to supply the required sample immediately; he was then given a glass of minerals to drink - Having waited for half an hour the applicant asked for permission to return to the track for the purpose of collecting his clothes and valuables; he was given that permission although he had not supplied the required sample - The applicant failed to return to the drug-control centre and left the sports ground - The applicant was due to attend the championship meeting on the next day to take part in the discus event, but he failed to do so - A few days later he telephoned one of the respondents" officers to explain his failure to return to the control centre but was told to furnish his explanation in writing - By a letter dated 15/8/87 the applicant gave the respondents an unconvincing explanation of his failure to return to the control centre and to furnish the requested sample - On 29/9/87 the respondents wrote to the applicant and informed him that, in accordance with the rules of the international body, he was suspended from all of the respondents" competitions and all international competitions for 18 months from 25/7/87; he was also informed that the international body would be given notice of his suspension - Although the applicant has been requested, and had agreed, to give a urine sample, the respondents did not give the applicant a copy of the notice which was approved by the international body, and which that body required to be given to an athlete before he was tested for drugs - That notice informs the recipient that he is required to attend at a drug control centre for the purpose of undergoing a drug test; but it also informs him that the control regulations of the international body apply to the proposed test and that a failure to attend at the relevant centre for the requested test "may result in disqualification" - The applicant, having obtained leave, applied in the High Court for an order of certiorari quashing the respondents" decision to suspend him from eligibility to participate in such competitions - Held, in granting the application, that the respondents" suspension of the applicant was not a harmless and temporary suspension imposed pending the outcome of an enquiry but was a suspension which involved the imposition of a substantial sanction or punishment for misbehaviour - Held that the respondents were bound to act in a judicial manner and in accordance with the principles of natural justice before imposing the sanction of suspension - Held that those principles demanded that the respondents should give the applicant an opportunity to be heard in his own defence before being condemned by the respondents - Held that the respondents had failed to give the applicant an adequate opportunity to defend himself despite their invitation that he should write to them and give his explanation - (1987/336 JR - Barr J. - 25/3/88)

|Quirke v. Bord Luthchleas an hEireann|

TRIBUNAL

Procedure

Fairness - Sports association - Amateur athletics - Governing body - Athlete requested to submit to drug test - Failure of athlete to furnish sample required for test - Athlete not warned that such failure might lead to disqualification - Athlete suspended from eligibility for participation in competitions for 18 months - Inadequate opportunity afforded athlete to answer complaint of governing body - ~See~ Natural Justice, fair procedures - (1987/336 JR - Barr J. - 25/3/88) - [1988] I.R. 83

|Quirke v. Bord Luthchleas na hEireann|

Citations:

HALSBURY'S LAWS 4ED VOL 1 PARA 65

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Barrdelivered on the 25th day of March, 1988

2 There is no significant controversy regarding the facts which have given rise to this application. The applicant is a well known Irish athlete who specializes in certain field events, notably shott-putting and discuss-throwing. He resides in the United States of America and has an international reputation in these events. He graduated from Manhatten College, New York, in 1986 having been a student there for several years pursuant to an athletics scholarship. While an undergraduate he represented his college in numerous prestigious athletics meetings in the United States and in that connection he became aware of the rules of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (I.A.A.F.) relating to dope-testing of athletes and of the procedures adopted by the...