Related cases:
- CAS 2010_A_2268 Igor Walilko vs FIA
September 15, 2011 - FIA 2010 FIA vs Igor Walilko
October 11, 2010 - FIA 2011 FIA vs Igor Walilko – CAS decision
September 15, 2011
The International Automobile Federation (FIA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the minor Polish Karting Driver Igor Walilko (12) after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Nikethamide.
On 11 October 2010 the FIA Anti-Doping Committee decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Driver starting on 18 July 2010.
In November 2010 the Driver appealed the FIA decision of 11 October 2010 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
The CAS Panel finds that it must apply the principle of proportionality in order to assess a sanction which could be appropriate to the case at stake. As a result, the Panel finds the suspension of two years decided by the FIA to be excessive and disproportionate.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled on 15 September 2011:
1.) The Appeal filed by the Athlete is partially upheld.
2.) The decision of 11 October 2010 by the Anti-Doping Committee-FIA Medical Commission of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) is set aside.
3.) The Athlete is declared ineligible for a period of 18, starting from 18 July 2010.
4.) The Athlete is disqualified from the individual results obtained in the karting event held in Ampfing, Germany on 18 July 2010, as well as from any competitive results obtained thereafter, with all resulting consequences including forfeiture of any trophies, points and prizes.
5.) This award is pronounced without costs, except for the Court Office fee of CHF 500 (five hundred Swiss Francs) already paid by the Appellant and to be retained by the CAS.
6.) Each party shall bear its own costs.
7.) All other requests, motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
Hereafter the Athlete made a Civil law appeal to the Swiss Federal Court, which was dismissed on 18 June 2012, due to the appeal became moot.
The Swiss Federal Court’s deemed in this case:
1.) The Court repeated that, with few exceptions, a ban that has already expired by the time the matter is adjudicated by the Federal Court renders the case incapable of appeal as to the expired ban.
2.) The Court also emphasized that should arguments be brought forward in the appeal brief only as to an issue where the appellant no longer has standing to appeal, but not as to other issues for which he retains an interest in obtaining a decision from the Swiss Federal Court, the matter becomes incapable of appeal for lack of submission of proper arguments.
