Dons’ chief defender shut out of WADA case

THE key legal force behind the Essendon 34’s defence will be blocked from leading the charge against the World AntiDoping Agency.

David Grace, QC, who steered the players to victory against the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, is required to recuse himself from the formal proceedings under Court of Arbitration for Sport rules.

Grace is a registered arbitrator with the body. Section 18 of the CAS code states: “Arbi- trators and mediators may not act as counsel for a party before the CAS.”

Grace is still expected to assist and provide advice to the players.

WADA has eight more days to submit its brief to the players’ lawyers, who will then have 20 days to respond.

It emerged yesterday that any player wanting to end the saga and do a deal with ASADA had missed their opportunity.

A player agent with clients caught up in the drama yesterday said some of the players were struggling to cope with WADA’s 11th-hour decision to appeal. The saga is now tipped to drag on into 2016, overshadowing a fourth AFL season.

Several other Australian CAS arbitrators have had involvement in the case, probably ruling them out them from sitting in judgment.

Malcolm Holmes, QC, acted for ASADA in the AFL anti-doping tribunal and Neil Young, QC, represented the anti-doping watchdog in its Federal Court fight with Essendon and James Hird.

Hayden Opie is a member of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel while Brian Collis, QC, has been a member of the AFL Appeals Tribunal.

The players’ fate will be decided by a panel of three approved CAS arbitrators. CAS decisions are usually unanimous, but the CAS code does allow majority (2-1) decisions.

One of the arbitrators will be named by the president of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Appeals Division, former Swiss skier Corinne Schmidhauser.

WADA will nominate one arbitrator and the players’ lawyers will select the other, with some international arbitrators likely to be involved.

It was reported yesterday that WADA would argue the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal did not give proper consideration to evidence from key witnesses Shane Charter and Nima Alavi.

Charter and compounding pharmacist Alavi both co-operated with ASADA during the investigation but refused to sign statements or appear as witnesses at the tribunal.

ASADA failed in a Supreme Court challenge to have the men compelled to attend.

It is expected the eventual hearing will take place in Melbourne or Sydney in the coming months.