Jamaican hammer athlete Nayoka Clunis has suffered another setback after the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) dismissed her appeal against World Athletics’ decision to exclude her from the Paris 2024 Olympic Games. The ruling, issued on February 26, 2025, by Sole Arbitrator Prof. Dr. Ulrich Haas, concluded that CAS had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, leaving Clunis without further legal recourse.

The dispute arose after the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA) failed to include Clunis’ name in the final list of confirmed athletes submitted to World Athletics by the July 4, 2024, deadline. Although she had qualified for the Olympics based on her World Ranking (23rd in the world), the omission resulted in her quota spot being reallocated to Ukraine’s Iryna Klymets.

Clunis and her legal representatives, Mr. Saverio P. Spera and Mr. Jacques Blondin of SP.IN Law, Zurich, challenged the decision, arguing that the exclusion resulted from an administrative oversight exacerbated by the impact of Hurricane Beryl, which affected Jamaica on July 3, 2024. JAAA later sought World Athletics’ assistance in rectifying the mistake but was informed that all available quota spots had been filled.

Following unsuccessful attempts to gain relief through the CAS Ad Hoc Division for the Paris Games, Clunis formally appealed to CAS, naming World Athletics and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as respondents. However, the panel ruled that it had no jurisdiction over the matter, stating that the applicable World Athletics regulations did not provide an avenue for Clunis to bring her claim directly to CAS.

In the ruling, Professor Haas emphasized that the CAS lacked jurisdiction because Clunis had no direct arbitration agreement with World Athletics or the IOC. He also noted that while the case was unfortunate, the strict application of the Olympic entry process left no room for exceptions. Furthermore, the panel found that JAAA’s failure to submit Clunis’ name in time was not a force majeure situation but an administrative oversight, which does not warrant overriding the established entry rules.

Notably, associated costs were not included in the decision, potentially leaving Clunis responsible for legal and arbitration-related expenses. This could pose a significant financial burden on the athlete, who had already been denied the opportunity to compete at the Olympics due to administrative failings beyond her control.