In another setback to Dr Dank, following the anti-doping agency's declaration this week that he should never work in sport again, the Court of Appeal on Thursday rejected his attempt to revive his lawsuit against the Sharks, its former chairman Damian Irvine and a News Ltd journalist.

Dr Dank claims that newspaper articles and a Channel Nine news segment suggested that he administered performance-enhancing substances to players, including Cronulla player Jon Mannah, who died from lymphoma last year.

The publications allegedly implied that there was a link between the supplements, known as peptides, and Mannah's death.

However, on Thursday a three-judge appeal panel unanimously rejected the doctor's appeal against an earlier decision by Justice Lucy McCallum, who dismissed his action against the Sharks and "struck out" his allegations against News Ltd journalist Phil Rothfield.

Justice McCallum's decision was based on the fact that, rather than pointing to a specific publication in which Mr Irvine or the Sharks had defamed him, Dr Dank had only presented a "collection of oral remarks and tweets", which may have been spoken or written at different times.

Dr Dank's lawyers were given the opportunity to ask specific questions of Mr Irvine and the Sharks about what they said and when, but they elected not to take up this offer because of what they felt were unfair limitations on what questions they could ask.

As a result, he was found to have "failed to bring the pleadings into good order".

The Court of Appeal upheld that finding on Thursday, and the consequent finding that Dr Dank had failed to plead a "reasonable cause of action" against  Mr Rothfield.

Dr Dank still has other defamation actions pending against Channel Nine, News Ltd and at least one other News Ltd journalist.

These actions are expected to return to court in the coming weeks, although they are likely to be affected by Thursday's decision.