TAS 2008/A/1612 M, Rasmussen c/ FMC
CAS 2008/A/1612 Michael Rasmussen c/ FMC
Related cases:
- Dutch District Court 2008 Michael Rasmussen vs RABO Wielerploegen
July 2, 2008 - Dutch Court of Appeal 2012 Michael Rasmussen vs RABO Wielerploegen
June 19, 2012 - Dutch Court of Appeal 2013 Michael Rasmussen vs RABO Wielerploegen
June 25, 2013
On 30 June 2008 the Fédération Monégasque de Cyclisme (FMC) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the cyclist Michael Rasmussen for multiple anti-doping rule violations he committed:
- 3 warnings for his whereabouts filing failures within a period of 18 months between May 2007 and July 2008;
- 1 warning for filing false whereabouts for the period April-June 2007.
Hereafter in July 2008 the Athlete appealed the FMC Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to annul the Appealed Decision and to impose a reduced sanction.
In the matter of his 1st and 3rd warning the Athlete disputed the competence of Anti-Doping Denmark (ADD) to conduct out-of-competition testing in April and in June 2007. Regarding the second warning the Athlete argued that he timely had submitted valid whereabouts information to the UCI.
Further the Athlete disputed the validity of the 4th warning because this was issued by the UCI only following his admission in November 2007, during an anti-doping investigation, that he had provided falsified whereabouts information.
The Panel established that the Athlete was included in the ADD testing pool and accordingly that the ADD had authority to submit the Athlete to sample collection. The Panel determines that the 2nd warning was valid due to the Athlete had anyhow not submitted timely his whereabouts to the UCI.
The Panel deems that UCI's 4th warning was also valid because the Athlete knowingly had provided false whereabouts information. As a result the Athlete had tampered with any part of the doping control.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 22 January 2009 to uphold the Appealed Decision of 30 June 2008 and rules that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.
