Essendon coach James Hird has suffered a second resounding court defeat in his bid to discredit an anti-doping investigation into the club.
Hird was not present in the Federal Court to hear Justice Susan Kenny dismiss his appeal as she ruled the joint ASADA/AFL probe legal.
The decision means ASADA's doping case against 34 past and present Essendon players continues uninterrupted in the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal.
Justice Kenny said the investigation into Essendon's 2012 supplements program was authorised by both the ASADA act and National Anti-Doping (NAD) scheme.
"This legislative scheme envisaged that there would be close co-operation between ASADA and sporting administration bodies such as the AFL, in anti-doping investigations," she said on Friday.
"The legislative scheme enabled ASADA to benefit lawfully from the AFL's use of its compulsory contractual powers, including by requiring Essendon players and personnel to attend interviews."
Hird's barrister Peter Hanks QC argued in last November's appeal ASADA had illegally recruited the AFL to force Essendon players to answer questions.
But Justice Kenny said there was no unfairness to Hird or the players in the way the interviews were conducted, and they were all legally represented.
"They and their lawyers were on notice before and at the interviews that the AFL and ASADA proposed to conduct the interviews together," she said.
"They could have been in no doubt about the purposes of the interviews."
Federal Court Justice John Middleton last September dismissed Hird and Essendon's challenge to the legality of the ASADA/AFL investigation.
After that finding, ASADA reissued the doping allegations to the players.
Hird broke ranks with his club and opted to appeal Justice Middleton's decision alone.
ASADA has always maintained its lock-step co-operation with the AFL was a conscious and legal decision.
ASADA barrister Tom Howe QC told the appeal that if ASADA could not reap the benefit of the AFL's coercive powers, it would be toothless.
ASADA chief executive Ben McDevitt said the judgment reaffirms ASADA's view that it has a joint responsibility with sporting bodies to uphold clean competition.
"ASADA and sports must partner if we are to have any chance in protecting the integrity of fair competition," he said in a statement.
Justice Kenny dismissed the appeal on behalf of the Full Court, comprising Anthony Besanko and Richard White, and ordered Hird pay ASADA's costs.
Essendon officials present in court made no comment after the judgment.
Share
