Former British Cycling sprinter Jess Varnish will be back in court in May after an employment tribunal ruled that she has the full right to appeal the body's decision in January.

Varnish, who was removed from the High Performance Program before the 2016 Rio Olympics, has been fighting to be declared an employee of British Cycling or UK Sport.

After failing to qualify for the Olympics in the team sprint with partner Katie Merchant, Varnish was an outspoken critic of British Cycling's coaches' strategy for qualification. Both Varnish and Merchant were critical, but only Varnish was fired, ostensibly for "performance reasons."

Varnish accused Shane Sutton, then technical director, of sexism and discrimination. Sutton resigned from his position at the federation and was later cleared of eight of the nine allegations.

"After the initial decision was unfavorable, we could have easily walked away.

"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 so greatly affected. [We hope that this appeal will be the first step in influencing change and bring 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."

Burnish and her lawyers argued that funded athletes should be classified as "employees" or "workers" rather than "self-employed."

Employee status comes with protection from discrimination, minimum wage, paid leave, whistleblower protection, maternity benefits, and pensions. Olympic sports are funded by athlete performance awards, which are considered subsidies, not salaries.

If Varnish's trial is successful, it could have a ripple effect throughout the Olympic sports community.