thearenagroup
Tuesday 7th September 2010
Elliot Hilton Beats NISA in Court Judgement
In the High Court on Wednesday 18th March 2009, Lord Justice Eady ruled that, under contract law, Elliot Hilton is entitled to be selected as the Senior Men's Singles Figure Skating representative for the 2009 World Championships. Justice Eady declared that the Qualifications Standards document published on the NISA website in September 2008 was contractually binding on NISA and therefore their decision to ‘move the goal posts’ later by issueing a modified selection criteria was an unacceptable attempt to influence the decision in favour of another Skater. The result of the change in the selection criteria meant that Elliot Hilton, who was originally met the selection criteria for the World Championships, was superceded by another skater, Matthew Parr, who did not. NISA, on Friday March 19th released a statement making reference to the fact that they had sought the advice of two independent sources prior to changing the criteria and therefore acted in good faith [to read that statement click here]. However, the High Court Judgement [link at bottom of page to Judgement] makes it clear that Haig Ouidjan – NISA Board Chairman actually sought advice from Simon Briggs – Matthew Parr’s Coach. It does not state who the other sources were. As a result the High Court Judgement stated that:- “Following this, on 23 February 2009, there was a ruling made by the 3 persons selection appeals committee. This committee found that the decision had not been made fairly and the appeal was allowed on the basis that the selection should be remitted for a re-decision. The appeal committee also found that there was an unacceptable attempt to influence the decision in Mr Parr’s favour of the appeal committee by Haig Oundjian, acting as secretary to the appeal committee and Chairman of the Board.” The High Court judgement raises a number of disturbing issues particularly Haig Oundjian’s attempt to influence the appeal committee’s hearing and Simon Briggs’ part (albeit he declared an interest) in the decision making. As far as I am concerned, so much damage has been done to British skaters and the reputation of British skating, that those members of NISA’s board who played any part in changing the selection of skaters mid-way through the season should carry the can, admit they were wrong to take the action they did and resign immediately. There is also the question of costs. NISA did not have insurance cover, so will have to pay its own costs and the claimant’s [Deemed in the High Court Judgement Summary as £24,112.04 – see link below]. This means there is a sum of around £45,000 that presumably will have to be paid from NISA’s funds – much of which is money paid to the association by its members. While many NISA members may think that the entire board should have resigned immediately after the case, no board member resigned at the emergency meeting on Friday (March 20). Instead much of the meeting was spent discussing which existing members would be standing for re-election at the board elections in May. It is entirely reasonable, in light of the financial burden that the new board will inherit, that the present chairman, Haig Oundjian undertakes to NISA members that he will not be standing for re-election.
In the High Court on Wednesday 18th March 2009, Lord Justice Eady ruled that, under contract law, Elliot Hilton is entitled to be selected as the Senior Men's Singles Figure Skating representative for the 2009 World Championships. Justice Eady declared that the Qualifications Standards document published on the NISA website in September 2008 was contractually binding on NISA and therefore their decision to ‘move the goal posts’ later by issueing a modified selection criteria was an unacceptable attempt to influence the decision in favour of another Skater. The result of the change in the selection criteria meant that Elliot Hilton, who was originally met the selection criteria for the World Championships, was superceded by another skater, Matthew Parr, who did not. NISA, on Friday March 19th released a statement making reference to the fact that they had sought the advice of two independent sources prior to changing the criteria and therefore acted in good faith [to read that statement click here]. However, the High Court Judgement [link at bottom of page to Judgement] makes it clear that Haig Ouidjan – NISA Board Chairman actually sought advice from Simon Briggs – Matthew Parr’s Coach. It does not state who the other sources were. As a result the High Court Judgement stated that:- “Following this, on 23 February 2009, there was a ruling made by the 3 persons selection appeals committee. This committee found that the decision had not been made fairly and the appeal was allowed on the basis that the selection should be remitted for a re-decision. The appeal committee also found that there was an unacceptable attempt to influence the decision in Mr Parr’s favour of the appeal committee by Haig Oundjian, acting as secretary to the appeal committee and Chairman of the Board.” The High Court judgement raises a number of disturbing issues particularly Haig Oundjian’s attempt to influence the appeal committee’s hearing and Simon Briggs’ part (albeit he declared an interest) in the decision making. As far as I am concerned, so much damage has been done to British skaters and the reputation of British skating, that those members of NISA’s board who played any part in changing the selection of skaters mid-way through the season should carry the can, admit they were wrong to take the action they did and resign immediately. There is also the question of costs. NISA did not have insurance cover, so will have to pay its own costs and the claimant’s [Deemed in the High Court Judgement Summary as £24,112.04 – see link below]. This means there is a sum of around £45,000 that presumably will have to be paid from NISA’s funds – much of which is money paid to the association by its members. While many NISA members may think that the entire board should have resigned immediately after the case, no board member resigned at the emergency meeting on Friday (March 20). Instead much of the meeting was spent discussing which existing members would be standing for re-election at the board elections in May. It is entirely reasonable, in light of the financial burden that the new board will inherit, that the present chairman, Haig Oundjian undertakes to NISA members that he will not be standing for re-election.