Juliet Lahood v Australian Taekwondo

The Appellant is a Taekwondo athlete who has represented Australia; she disputed her non-selection by the Australian Taekwondo Selection Panel to go to the Continental Qualification Tournament held in Honiara on 6 April 2024. Australian Taekwondo is the Respondent. 

In this matter, there was an Interested Party identified. The Interested Party was selected to compete at the Tournament, but her selection would be jeopardised, should Australian Taekwondo be required to reconsider the selection of the Appellant. The Appellant and the Interested Party both compete in the Female 49kg Weight Category. 

The non-selection was appealed pursuant to clause 5.2(b)(iv) of the Australian Taekwondo Selection Appeals Policy; the Appellant contended that there was no material on which Australian Taekwondo’s decision could be reasonably based. 

The Tribunal explained the use of the word, ‘reasonable’, in its administrative law context. Divergence of opinion in the decision-making body does not mean that their decision is unreasonable. It must be shown that the decision-maker acted in a manner that was irrational, illogical, and not based upon findings or inferences of fact supported by logical grounds. The Tribunal found that the decision made by the Selection Panel was reasonably made and was rational and supported by fundamentally logical grounds.

The Tribunal dismissed the application.