Jess Varnish insists she has emerged as a winner despite losing her landmark employment case against British Cycling and UK Sport because both bodies have made significant changes since she exposed what she described as the “culture of fear and lack of athlete welfare in the British world class performance system”.

The former track cyclist was left disappointed on Wednesday when a judge dismissed her claim that she should have been regarded as an employee of British Cycling and UK Sport and thus subject to sick pay, a pension and the right to sue for unfair dismissal.

Jess Varnish loses employment tribunal against British Cycling and UK Sport Read more

However, Varnish insisted that she could hold her head up high despite the result. “When I first spoke out, these organisations said I was wrong and there wasn’t a problem,” she said. “I’m happy that I and other athletes could show them otherwise and enable them to change their structure, their policies and their personnel. To change so significantly in the past three years can only be proof that a problem originally existed.”

Varnish also insisted that she had no regrets at mounting a legal challenge because there was no other avenue open to British athletes. “It took two leading barristers, a team of eight lawyers, a seven-day tribunal, close to £1m in legal fees and a proclamation that the ‘skies would fall in’ if the system was changed for British Cycling and UK Sport, to answer some simple questions posed by one athlete about the set-up of the world class performance system,” she said.

“The defence and tactics used against me at times were aggressive, my character was repeatedly called into question, my motives challenged. This wasn’t a defence that upheld the Olympic ideals rather one that embraced the win-at-all-costs mentality for which they’d recently been criticised. The irony for me is, right at the beginning of this process, when I met with British Cycling, all I asked for was an apology and commitment to improve athlete welfare. Neither were given.”

Sign up to The Recap, our weekly email of editors’ picks.

In a 42-page verdict released on Thursday, Judge Ross said Varnish could not be regarded as an employee of British Cycling because “she was not performing work provided by the respondent – rather she was personally performing a commitment to train in accordance with the individual rider agreement in the hope of achieving success at international competitions.”

Judge Ross also dismissed Varnish’s claims that she worked for UK Sport, adding: “She was receiving a non-repayable publicly funded grant to enable her to pay her living expenses so she could have the best chance of focusing on her training, without the need to take a job.”