INTRODUCTION

1. A dispute has arisen concerning the nomination by Equestrian Australia of athlete and horse combinations for selection to the 2012 Australian Olympic Jumping Team. On 5 June 2012, the appellant, Ms Amy Graham, was informed by the National Selection Panel of Equestrian Australia (the Panel) that she and her horse Bella Baloubet (the Graham Combination) had not been selected for nomination to the Australian Olympic Committee as one of the combinations for the Jumping Team. Ms Graham lodged an appeal to an appeals tribunal established by Equestrian Australia, consisting of Mr Stephen McEwen QC, Ms Zali Steggall and Mr Nigel Nicholls (the Tribunal). On 15 June 2012, the Tribunal decided to allow the appeal +on the basis of one of several arguments advanced on behalf of Ms Graham. The Tribunal referred the matter back to Equestrian Australia for further consideration.

2. On 21 June 2012, Ms Graham lodged an appeal from the decision of the Tribunal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (the Court). On the same day, the Panel made a second nomination decision for the Jumping Team pursuant to the Tribunal's decision. The Graham Combination was again not selected for nomination. The second nomination decision was circulated on 26 June 2012. On 28 June 2012, Ms Graham lodged an appeal to the Court from the Panel's second nomination decision. I shall explain below the inter-relationship between the two appeals and the procedural technicalities that are raised by them.

3. By Order of Procedure signed on behalf of Ms Graham and Equestrian Australia, those parties agreed that the Court has jurisdiction to determine, by arbitration, the dispute that is the subject of the appeals and agreed to refer the dispute to the Court for determination by arbitration. The parties agreed that, for the purposes of the arbitration, the Court would be constituted by me as a sole arbitrator, with the object of arbitrating on the dispute, and rendering an award in conformity with the agreement between the parties to submit their dispute for arbitration before the Court according to the Code of Sports-related Arbitration published by the Court (the Code). Because of the imminence of the 2012 Olympic Games in London, there is considerable urgency in having the dispute resolved.

4. On 3 July 2012, I received evidence in the form of documentary material. I have also received written submissions from Ms Graham and from Equestrian Australia and have heard oral argument from counsel on behalf of those parties. Before dealing with the grounds of the appeals, it is necessary to say something about the regulatory framework within which the arbitration is conducted.