Latest news with #AppealPanel
Hindustan Times
22-05-2025
- Sport
- Hindustan Times
Neeraj Chopra's ex-coach slams Shivpal Singh over failed doping test: ‘I'm really pissed off… This is like cheating'
Shivpal Singh reportedly has failed a doping test for the second time in his career, and the Indian Olympiam javelin thrower is set to receive a ban of upto a maximum period of eight years if found guilty. According to an earlier PTI report, Shivpal, who competed at the Tokyo Olympics, returned positive after his urine sample in an out-of-competition test earlier this year. He has been provisionally suspended by the NADA. Reacting to the development, Neeraj Chopra's ex-coach Klaus Bartonietz was left fuming at the 29-year-old. Speaking to PTI, he slammed Shivpal, saying, 'Disappointed? I don't know. But I'm really pissed off. So stupid.' 'It shows that you don't trust in this process. All those who are doping don't trust that they can reach the top by normal nature of training.' The German bio-mechanics expert also said, 'It makes me so angry that they are promoting javelin throw everywhere and coming from a family of javelin throwers and then doing these things.' 'This is like cheating. And carrying the Indian flag proudly, saying Jai Hind, by cheating. I have no word for this. (But) the good thing about the Shivpal story is that, he got caught. So, the system is working,' he added. Earlier in 2021, Shivpal's dope sample returned positive for a steroid in an out-of-compeition test. In August 2022, NADA handed him a four-year ban, beginning from 2021, deeming him guilty. He had to serve the ban till 2025, but succesfully argued before the Appeal Panel that he tested positive due to contaminated supplments. On January 2023, the Appeal Panel accepted his contention and reduced the ban to only one year. He was back in action in April 2023 and bagged bronze at the National Inter-State C'ships in June that year, and also got gold in the 2023 National Games.
NDTV
20-05-2025
- Sport
- NDTV
India's Star Javelin Thrower At Tokyo Olympics Fails Dope Test, Stares At 8-Year Ban
Olympian javelin thrower Shivpal Singh has failed a dope test for the second time in his career, a development which may see him being banned for a maximum period of eight years if found guilty. The 29-year-old, who competed at the Tokyo Olympics, is learnt to have returned positive for a banned substance when his urine sample taken out of competition earlier this year was tested. He was training at the NIS Patiala then. He has been provisionally suspended by the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA). "Yes, he has tested positive for a banned substance. It's his second dope offence," a source privy to the development told PTI on conditions of anonymity. If proven guilty and handed a lengthy ban, Shivpal's career will be as good as over. Under the NADA and WADA rules, an athlete can be banned for a maximum eight years for a second doping offence. Shivpal's best achievement in his career is the silver medal he had won at the 2019 Asian Championships in Doha, where he had thrown his personal best of 86.23m. Earlier in 2021, Shivpal's dope sample had tested positive for a steroid in an out-of-competition test. The Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of NADA, in August 2022, had handed him a four-year ban beginning from 2021, holding him guilty of committing a doping offence. He was to serve the ban till 2025 but was able to argue successfully before the Appeal Panel of the NADA that "contaminated supplements" were behind his flunked dope test. The Appeal Panel, in January 2023, accepted his contention and reduced the ban period from four years to just one. He returned to action in April 2023 and won a bronze at the National Inter-State Championships in Bhubaneswar in June that year. He also won gold in the 2023 National Games in Goa.
Hindustan Times
20-05-2025
- Sport
- Hindustan Times
Olympian javelin thrower Shivpal fails dope test, stares at maximum 8-year ban
New Delhi, Olympian javelin thrower Shivpal Singh has failed a dope test for the second time in his career, a development which may see him being banned for a maximum period of eight years if found guilty. The 29-year-old, who competed at the Tokyo Olympics, is learnt to have returned positive for a banned substance when his urine sample taken out of competition earlier this year was tested. He was training at the NIS Patiala then. He has been provisionally suspended by the National Anti-Doping Agency . "Yes, he has tested positive for a banned substance. It's his second dope offence," a source privy to the development told PTI on conditions of anonymity. If proven guilty and handed a lengthy ban, Shivpal's career will be as good as over. Under the NADA and WADA rules, an athlete can be banned for a maximum eight years for a second doping offence. Shivpal's best achievement in his career is the silver medal he had won at the 2019 Asian Championships in Doha, where he had thrown his personal best of 86.23m. Earlier in 2021, Shivpal's dope sample had tested positive for a steroid in an out-of-competition test. The Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of NADA, in August 2022, had handed him a four-year ban beginning from 2021, holding him guilty of committing a doping offence. He was to serve the ban till 2025 but was able to argue successfully before the Appeal Panel of the NADA that "contaminated supplements" were behind his flunked dope test. The Appeal Panel, in January 2023, accepted his contention and reduced the ban period from four years to just one. He returned to action in April 2023 and won a bronze at the National Inter-State Championships in Bhubaneswar in June that year. He also won gold in the 2023 National Games in Goa.
The Advertiser
19-05-2025
- The Advertiser
New renters' rights fail to provide 'peace, privacy and comfort' for lodgers
NEW laws that strengthen renters' rights in NSW have left many people out in the cold. For those who pay rent for a single room in a group house, or who live in a shared accommodation-style arrangement, the new laws do not apply. They appear to be in no-man's land with hopes they will be given some protections when legislative changes to the laws governing boarding houses come into effect. However, there is no timeframe in which that will occur. A decision handed down in the Supreme Court of Appeal has added weight to he notion that people regarded as boarders or lodgers, and who sign agreements as such, are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act. The matter of Shapkin versus the University of Sydney first came to court in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in 2022. The tribunal sided with the university, as did the Appeal Panel, which held a hearing in January 2023. Mr Shapkin then sought leave to appeal from the Appeal Panel's decision, which was heard in December 2023, and he was granted leave to appeal on two out of three grounds. That hearing took place on May 5, and reasons as to why leave to appeal was refused were handed down on May 16. At each juncture, the courts have sided with the landlord by regarding Mr Shapkin as a lodger, even though his landlord, which can be a person or an entity, does not physically reside with him. For an occupant to be a boarder or a lodger, the owner must remain in possession and retain his quality as "master of the house", with "control and dominion" over the hall, the decision says. The coordinator of the Hunter Tenants Advice and Advocacy Service, Nicole Grgas, says the Shapkin decision is "really troubling". SPL has come under fire for its treatment of occupants living in SPL-managed group homes, where they are said to conduct spot inspections on a regular basis, as often as every two days, without warning and without waiting to see if anyone is home, rifling through personal belongings. The organisation has also been heavily criticised for evicting people and/or relocating them with little or no notice. "If these were residential tenancy agreements, then you have a right to peace, comfort and privacy, and the landlord can only come with certain notice," Ms Grgas said. "The tribunal has most recently found, and I don't know if I want to advertise it, that these are not tenancy agreements." That means the increasing number of people paying rent per room will not be afforded the protections of the legislative changes, which came into effect on Monday. While it is now easier for those renters to have pets in their homes, and feel more secure in the knowledge that 'no grounds' evictions are now unlawful, lodgers continue to live in fear of being evicted or relocated at a moment's notice. Last week, several residents were forced to move from an SPL-managed property at Rutherford, to which police were called on Monday when SPL staff turned up unannounced, demanding access to the property to retrieve furniture. The residents had been given less than one business day's notice that they were being relocated. The week before that, on May 5, SPL moved 20 people out of homes in Elemore Vale. They were given five days' notice, but SPL staff turned up without notice with a removalist truck two days early, at 6am, the Newcastle Herald was told. Mr Mason has denied any wrongdoing. NEW laws that strengthen renters' rights in NSW have left many people out in the cold. For those who pay rent for a single room in a group house, or who live in a shared accommodation-style arrangement, the new laws do not apply. They appear to be in no-man's land with hopes they will be given some protections when legislative changes to the laws governing boarding houses come into effect. However, there is no timeframe in which that will occur. A decision handed down in the Supreme Court of Appeal has added weight to he notion that people regarded as boarders or lodgers, and who sign agreements as such, are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act. The matter of Shapkin versus the University of Sydney first came to court in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in 2022. The tribunal sided with the university, as did the Appeal Panel, which held a hearing in January 2023. Mr Shapkin then sought leave to appeal from the Appeal Panel's decision, which was heard in December 2023, and he was granted leave to appeal on two out of three grounds. That hearing took place on May 5, and reasons as to why leave to appeal was refused were handed down on May 16. At each juncture, the courts have sided with the landlord by regarding Mr Shapkin as a lodger, even though his landlord, which can be a person or an entity, does not physically reside with him. For an occupant to be a boarder or a lodger, the owner must remain in possession and retain his quality as "master of the house", with "control and dominion" over the hall, the decision says. The coordinator of the Hunter Tenants Advice and Advocacy Service, Nicole Grgas, says the Shapkin decision is "really troubling". SPL has come under fire for its treatment of occupants living in SPL-managed group homes, where they are said to conduct spot inspections on a regular basis, as often as every two days, without warning and without waiting to see if anyone is home, rifling through personal belongings. The organisation has also been heavily criticised for evicting people and/or relocating them with little or no notice. "If these were residential tenancy agreements, then you have a right to peace, comfort and privacy, and the landlord can only come with certain notice," Ms Grgas said. "The tribunal has most recently found, and I don't know if I want to advertise it, that these are not tenancy agreements." That means the increasing number of people paying rent per room will not be afforded the protections of the legislative changes, which came into effect on Monday. While it is now easier for those renters to have pets in their homes, and feel more secure in the knowledge that 'no grounds' evictions are now unlawful, lodgers continue to live in fear of being evicted or relocated at a moment's notice. Last week, several residents were forced to move from an SPL-managed property at Rutherford, to which police were called on Monday when SPL staff turned up unannounced, demanding access to the property to retrieve furniture. The residents had been given less than one business day's notice that they were being relocated. The week before that, on May 5, SPL moved 20 people out of homes in Elemore Vale. They were given five days' notice, but SPL staff turned up without notice with a removalist truck two days early, at 6am, the Newcastle Herald was told. Mr Mason has denied any wrongdoing. NEW laws that strengthen renters' rights in NSW have left many people out in the cold. For those who pay rent for a single room in a group house, or who live in a shared accommodation-style arrangement, the new laws do not apply. They appear to be in no-man's land with hopes they will be given some protections when legislative changes to the laws governing boarding houses come into effect. However, there is no timeframe in which that will occur. A decision handed down in the Supreme Court of Appeal has added weight to he notion that people regarded as boarders or lodgers, and who sign agreements as such, are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act. The matter of Shapkin versus the University of Sydney first came to court in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in 2022. The tribunal sided with the university, as did the Appeal Panel, which held a hearing in January 2023. Mr Shapkin then sought leave to appeal from the Appeal Panel's decision, which was heard in December 2023, and he was granted leave to appeal on two out of three grounds. That hearing took place on May 5, and reasons as to why leave to appeal was refused were handed down on May 16. At each juncture, the courts have sided with the landlord by regarding Mr Shapkin as a lodger, even though his landlord, which can be a person or an entity, does not physically reside with him. For an occupant to be a boarder or a lodger, the owner must remain in possession and retain his quality as "master of the house", with "control and dominion" over the hall, the decision says. The coordinator of the Hunter Tenants Advice and Advocacy Service, Nicole Grgas, says the Shapkin decision is "really troubling". SPL has come under fire for its treatment of occupants living in SPL-managed group homes, where they are said to conduct spot inspections on a regular basis, as often as every two days, without warning and without waiting to see if anyone is home, rifling through personal belongings. The organisation has also been heavily criticised for evicting people and/or relocating them with little or no notice. "If these were residential tenancy agreements, then you have a right to peace, comfort and privacy, and the landlord can only come with certain notice," Ms Grgas said. "The tribunal has most recently found, and I don't know if I want to advertise it, that these are not tenancy agreements." That means the increasing number of people paying rent per room will not be afforded the protections of the legislative changes, which came into effect on Monday. While it is now easier for those renters to have pets in their homes, and feel more secure in the knowledge that 'no grounds' evictions are now unlawful, lodgers continue to live in fear of being evicted or relocated at a moment's notice. Last week, several residents were forced to move from an SPL-managed property at Rutherford, to which police were called on Monday when SPL staff turned up unannounced, demanding access to the property to retrieve furniture. The residents had been given less than one business day's notice that they were being relocated. The week before that, on May 5, SPL moved 20 people out of homes in Elemore Vale. They were given five days' notice, but SPL staff turned up without notice with a removalist truck two days early, at 6am, the Newcastle Herald was told. Mr Mason has denied any wrongdoing. NEW laws that strengthen renters' rights in NSW have left many people out in the cold. For those who pay rent for a single room in a group house, or who live in a shared accommodation-style arrangement, the new laws do not apply. They appear to be in no-man's land with hopes they will be given some protections when legislative changes to the laws governing boarding houses come into effect. However, there is no timeframe in which that will occur. A decision handed down in the Supreme Court of Appeal has added weight to he notion that people regarded as boarders or lodgers, and who sign agreements as such, are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act. The matter of Shapkin versus the University of Sydney first came to court in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in 2022. The tribunal sided with the university, as did the Appeal Panel, which held a hearing in January 2023. Mr Shapkin then sought leave to appeal from the Appeal Panel's decision, which was heard in December 2023, and he was granted leave to appeal on two out of three grounds. That hearing took place on May 5, and reasons as to why leave to appeal was refused were handed down on May 16. At each juncture, the courts have sided with the landlord by regarding Mr Shapkin as a lodger, even though his landlord, which can be a person or an entity, does not physically reside with him. For an occupant to be a boarder or a lodger, the owner must remain in possession and retain his quality as "master of the house", with "control and dominion" over the hall, the decision says. The coordinator of the Hunter Tenants Advice and Advocacy Service, Nicole Grgas, says the Shapkin decision is "really troubling". SPL has come under fire for its treatment of occupants living in SPL-managed group homes, where they are said to conduct spot inspections on a regular basis, as often as every two days, without warning and without waiting to see if anyone is home, rifling through personal belongings. The organisation has also been heavily criticised for evicting people and/or relocating them with little or no notice. "If these were residential tenancy agreements, then you have a right to peace, comfort and privacy, and the landlord can only come with certain notice," Ms Grgas said. "The tribunal has most recently found, and I don't know if I want to advertise it, that these are not tenancy agreements." That means the increasing number of people paying rent per room will not be afforded the protections of the legislative changes, which came into effect on Monday. While it is now easier for those renters to have pets in their homes, and feel more secure in the knowledge that 'no grounds' evictions are now unlawful, lodgers continue to live in fear of being evicted or relocated at a moment's notice. Last week, several residents were forced to move from an SPL-managed property at Rutherford, to which police were called on Monday when SPL staff turned up unannounced, demanding access to the property to retrieve furniture. The residents had been given less than one business day's notice that they were being relocated. The week before that, on May 5, SPL moved 20 people out of homes in Elemore Vale. They were given five days' notice, but SPL staff turned up without notice with a removalist truck two days early, at 6am, the Newcastle Herald was told. Mr Mason has denied any wrongdoing.
29-04-2025
- Politics
Former WP Rugby president gets 10-year suspension
In a significant announcement from SA Rugby on Tuesday, an independent Appeal Panel has upheld a disciplinary sanction of misconduct imposed on Zelt Marais, formerly the president of the Western Province Rugby Football Union. He had been charged with misconduct following various statements made in communications to SA Rugby members and in public forums in 2022 and 2024. In upholding the sanction, Marais was suspended for 10 years from any and all positions in the South African Rugby Union (SARU), or any other rugby body, and from any and all rugby activities for breaching the SARU Code of Conduct. The Panel said it, and the Judicial Officer, had taken into account 'the total lack of remorse on the part of the appellant (Zelt Marais), which continued right up to the appeal, his ongoing justification for his actions and in effect still claiming that he was fully entitled to say what he had said on the basis that that what had been stated was 'the truth'. 'There had been no apology for his conduct, and in particular no public apology for his public remarks. There was ongoing lack of remorse and every possibility that he would continue along this path unless sanctioned in the manner in which the Judicial Officer decided to sanction his conduct.' The Independent Appeal Panel's 61-page finding held that the sanction imposed by the Judicial Officer was 'well motivated, among other things for the gravity of the charges, the fact that the acts of misconduct were ongoing, by a very senior office bearer of a member union who was well aware of his duties and responsibilities towards SARU.' Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 0211. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
