Jess Varnish has lost her appeal against an employment tribunal ruling, leaving her unable to take any further action against British Cycling.

In May, former track sprinter Jess Varnish returned to court to appeal the original ruling that she was not also an employee of the sport's governing body, UK Sport, which distributes lottery funds to Olympic and Paralympic athletes.

By establishing "employee" or "worker" status, Bernish hoped to gain the right to take legal action against British Cycling after it was removed from the Olympic program in 2016.

Burnish intended to sue for wrongful termination and discrimination and objected to being dropped for "performance reasons." An internal British Cycling investigation found that coach Shane Sutton had used "inappropriate and discriminatory language" against her, but only one of the eight allegations against the Australian was upheld.

In January 2019, an employment tribunal ruled against Varnish, deeming her lottery funds a "grant" and finding "no mutual obligation" between her and British Cycling. On Tuesday, the appeals court in Varnish upheld that ruling.

"The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the plaintiff was entitled to conclude that she was neither an employee nor a worker based on an evaluative determination that considered all relevant factors.

"The Tribunal did not err in its approach to the assessment of employee status, nor did it reach a conclusion that a properly directed and reasonable tribunal could not reach.

Varnish has not yet officially responded to the ruling, but British Cycling issued a statement at noon on Tuesday.

"We believe that the relationship between British Cycling and the riders who represent this country is not that of employer and employee, but that of an organization that supports dedicated athletes to reach their potential. This view was legally upheld in the first instance, and today's dismissal of Jess's appeal confirms that verdict.

"We had tried to reach a resolution with Jess earlier and regret that she was advised to pursue the employment tribunal route even though other avenues were open to her. Because of our responsibility to represent the best interests of all athletes who wish to compete in the Olympics and Paralympics, this decision means that we had no choice but to oppose her case.

"Since Jess raised her concerns about the Great Britain Cycling Team in 2016, we have made significant changes to the culture and processes of our High Performance Program. four years later, we are constantly seeking improvements, but our High Performance I am pleased to say that the well-being of our staff and athletes in the program continues to be our top priority."

Varnish was removed from the Olympic program in April 2016, a month after he and Katie Marchant publicly criticized British Cycling when they failed to qualify for the Olympic team sprint. British Cycling management claimed that she was fired purely for performance reasons, but Varnish claimed that she felt her comments triggered her dismissal and that her requests to show her performance data fell on deaf ears.

She then came forward with a sex discrimination claim against Sutton. An investigation by British Cycling found that Sutton had used "inappropriate and discriminatory language," but Varnish was outraged when it was later found that only one of the nine allegations against Sutton had been upheld.

She moved to sue for wrongful termination and discrimination, but her employment status became a bottleneck.

"We want to give athletes the opportunity to hold accountable the governing body officials with whom they interact on a daily basis and whose careers and opportunities are largely dependent on them," Varnish said prior to the appeal. [We hope that this appeal will be the first step in influencing change and bringing a fairer and more modern high performance system to the UK, where the welfare of athletes is not just something that sounds good, but something that we all believe in."