Three-time Olympian Brendan Kerry faces court filings alleging repeated sexual activity with 17-year-old in California

Court filings in the New South Wales Supreme Court allege Australian figure skater Brendan Kerry told investigators he had repeated sexual intercourse with a 17‑year‑old while living in California, a claim that sits at the centre of defamation proceedings Kerry brought against the New South Wales Ice Skating Association and two of its senior officials.

The filings, dated Aug. 15 and obtained by media outlets, say Kerry told United States Center for SafeSport investigators he had consensual sex with the girl "10–15, maybe 20 times" over an 11‑month period when she was 16 turning 17 and Kerry was 21 or 22. The documents say SafeSport concluded the conduct violated California criminal statutes and its athlete code of conduct, and that alcohol was provided and secrecy encouraged around the relationship.

The allegations are being contested in a defamation suit Kerry filed after the NSW Ice Skating Association (NSWISA) circulated an email to members referencing his permanent ban by the US Center for SafeSport. Kerry's lawyers allege the email framed him as a child molester and damaged his reputation within skating circles; the NSWISA, its president Peter Lynch and secretary Fiona Kusilek say their statements reflected official findings that are now matters of public record.

SafeSport imposed a permanent ban on Kerry, later adopted by US Figure Skating, barring him from participating in any Olympic‑affiliated event in the United States. That sanction took effect on May 14, 2024. According to the court documents, SafeSport determined the sexual conduct violated sections of the California Penal Code including 261.5(a) and 288(a). No criminal charges have been filed in Australia or the United States.

Kerry has consistently denied the allegations and has said the SafeSport process was flawed. In public statements he said he was sanctioned "for alleged violations that I did not commit." His appeal of the SafeSport ruling was dismissed in September 2024, according to the filings.

The distinction between legal standards is a feature of the dispute: the age of consent in New South Wales and most Australian jurisdictions is 16, while California law sets the age of consent at 18, meaning sexual activity with a person under 18 can constitute statutory rape under California law. Kerry's legal team argues those differences are relevant to whether the NSWISA email conveyed defamatory imputations in Australia.

Kerry represented Australia at three Winter Olympics and served as a flag‑bearer at the 2022 Beijing Games. He was the first Australian skater to land two different quadruple jumps in competition. The allegations and subsequent sanction have cast a shadow over his career in the sport.

The defendants in the defamation action rely on the SafeSport findings as a defence, arguing their communications reflected official determinations. Kerry's lawyers have indicated they will challenge the admissibility and weight of the SafeSport evidence in the NSW Supreme Court. The case is expected to continue later this year.

Media reports identified the accuser in the SafeSport investigation only as "Claimant 1" and described her as having had no prior sexual experience before meeting Kerry. The court filings also state SafeSport found that "perceived physical force" was applied during some encounters, language contained in the investigative findings. Those findings, as presented in the filings, form the factual basis for the defendants' reliance on public records in their defense.

The matter raises questions about cross‑jurisdictional disciplinary decisions, athlete safeguarding processes and how sporting bodies communicate sanctions to national membership. The NSW Supreme Court will determine whether the NSWISA's email and related statements were defamatory under Australian law and, if so, whether defences such as qualified privilege or truth are available to the defendants.

No criminal proceedings have been opened in parallel to the SafeSport investigation, and parties in the civil case have made public statements through counsel denying or contesting the allegations. The court will consider evidence from the SafeSport investigation, the communications circulated by NSWISA and the submissions of counsel as the defamation proceedings proceed.