Even if her appeal fails there are suggestions that legal recourse may yet see Christine Ohuruogu eligible for Beijing

ChristinE Ohuruogu was last night named Britain's woman athlete of the year. By the end of this week, the country's only athletics world champion should know whether she can start training in earnest to race at next year's Beijing Olympics.

Ohuruogu has been in a sporting limbo since winning the 400 metres world title in Osaka in August, less than a month and just a handful of races into a dramatic comeback following a 12-month ban for missing three out-of-competition drug tests.

The outcome of Ohuruogu's appeal to the British Olympic Association against a lifetime ban from the Games is expected to be announced this week. "We are expecting a decision towards the end of the month," a BOA spokeswoman confirmed last night.

The only reason for a further delay would be if the runner insisted on having a personal hearing in the presence of the appeal panel.

Ohuruogu lodged her appeal in July, before she had her first comeback race at the Scottish championships in Glasgow and before she was selected for the world championships in Japan. Her stunning performance in the 400m final in Osaka, where she out-dipped team-mate Nicola Sanders by just 0.04sec to take the gold, led to Ohuruogu being honoured at the British Athletics Writers' Association's annual dinner in London last night, not only as the woman athlete of the year but also for producing the best performance of 2007 in a British vest.

The appeal panel has so far reviewed written evidence and submissions, including support from Ohuruogu's governing body, UK Athletics, plus an international Court for Arbitration in Sport ruling that states that there was no evidence that the 23-year-old Londoner was using banned drugs or trying to cheat when she missed three test appointments during an 18-month period.

Her drug test record - which shows that Ohuruogu was tested between the missed appointments - is also believed to be among the evidence, although last night UK Sport refused to release details of how often the runner has been tested over the past two years. "We don't and can't release individual athletes' test histories unless their governing body and/or the athlete requests it," a spokesman said. "We encourage sports to be as open and transparent as possible."

The appeal panel has been chaired by Nick Stewart QC, a deputy high court judge. Significantly, earlier this year, Stewart also oversaw the appeal against a similar BOA ban on triathlete Tim Don. Don had also missed three out-of-competition tests, but the 2006 world champion has now been cleared to try to make the British Olympic team next year.

"There are precedents for it," Ohuruogu said of her own appeal. "I'm hoping that's the case.

"If you deliberately take a substance to cheat then I think you should be banned for life.

"What I don't understand is why people are saying that I shouldn't be selected for Beijing. I'm not the first person this has happened to and if other people can be cleared, then by simple logic, then I should be."

Oddly, BOA chief executive Simon Clegg has publicly denied that the Don case, or the successful appeal of judo player Peter Cousins, another who missed out-of-competition tests, has established any sort of precedent for Ohuruogu's appeal to succeed.

"I don't believe any precedent has been set by those cases," Clegg said a month ago. "There are three grounds by which the athlete can appeal against the lifetime ban: if it's minor, if there are mitigating circumstances and if there's no significant fault on the part of the athlete."

Well-placed sources suggest that in the past fortnight, senior BOA officials have been briefing rigorously to expect an adverse response to the Ohuruogu appeal. The question arises: why?

The BOA is known to be uncomfortable with enforcing its own bye law. Britain is one of only three countries that applies such a life ban but, including Scottish skier Alain Baxter, the BOA has allowed 25 of the last 28 appeals against the rule.

However, the BOA chairman, Lord Moynihan, as a former minister for sport under Margaret Thatcher, may see it as politically awkward to dispense with a zero tolerance rule on doping.

In an apparently separate development, Michael Beloff QC, one of the world's leading sports and human rights lawyers, has come forward to offer his silken services to Ohuruogu for free should she need to go to the courts to overturn the BOA's ruling. Beloff is one of the most highly regarded and well-paid lawyers around - he turned down an appointment as a high court judge because he could not afford to take the pay cut.

His late father was enobled by Thatcher and Beloff is also a close colleague of Cherie Blair. He has served on the disciplinary panels at the last three summer Olympics and also defended, unsuccessfully, Dwain Chambers after he was caught using steroids.

Such a high-powered legal challenge to the BOA's rule, in a strong case such as Ohuruogu's, might just achieve what Lord Moynihan and the BOA dare not do, and dispatch the unwanted lifetime Olympic ban. More importantly for Ohuruogu, though, is whether such a court case could make her available for Olympic selection in time for the Beijing Games.