CAS 2015/A/4127 Ian Chan v. Canadian Wheelchair Sports Association (CWSA) and Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES)
Related case:
SDRCC 2015 CCES vs Ian Chan
June 23, 2015
Wheelchair Rugby
Doping (oxycodone & fentanyl)
Condition of elimination of the period of ineligibility under no fault or negligence in a case of addiction
Assessment of an athlete’s degree of fault to determine a reduction of the period of ineligibility for a specified substance
1. Under the applicable rules, addiction by substance abuse or depression might be grounds for consideration of the elimination of an athlete’s period of ineligibility provided there is persuasive evidence and likely expert opinion evidence suggesting that because of his condition an athlete was either not at fault or had very little fault to have committed an anti-doping rule violation. However, where there is a total lack of evidence other than an athlete’s personal assertion, there is no possibility of issuing an order eliminating the period of ineligibility.
2. The athlete’s degree of fault must be determined on the basis of the available evidence. The athlete must establish why his departure from the expected standard of behaviour justifies a reduction of the sanction. In that inquiry, each case will turn on its own facts and the examination of other adjudication decisions does not further the particular case.
In March 2015 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete, a wheelchair rugby player, after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances fentalyl and oxycodone.
The Athlete admitted the violation and stated that he mentioned the use of oxycodone on the Doping Control Form with a TUE application still under review.
Due to his medical and personal situation the Athlete suffered from depression, severe pains, spasticity, abcesses, and pressure sores. He used prescribed oxycodone and also oxycodone supplied by a friend. The Athlete acknowledged that he did not conduct any research to ensure that these pills were not contaminated with a prohibited substance (fentalyl).
The Tribunal of the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada finds that the Athlete failed in his responsibility that no prohibited substances enter his body. Considering the Athlete’s circumstances and with a high degree of fault the Tribunal decides on 23 June 2015 to impose a 16 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
Hereafter in June 2015 the Athlete appealed the decision of 23 June 2015 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Athlete filed the following arguments in his defence:
- He suffers from depression and has an addiction, both of which are underlying mental health issues that “are screaming for recognition”. No case before the SDRCC, AAA or CAS has dealt with these specific issues in a doping context.
- The AAF was due wholly or largely to the Athlete’s crippling addiction to Oxycodone.
- Oxycodone has little sporting benefit for someone in wheelchair rugby.
- The Athlete took Oxycodone as a necessity for pain management, not experimentally or socially.
- As a result of the necessity, he became addicted to the powerful opioid and is now suffering the devastating consequences both personally and professionally of that “irresistible coercion”.
- When his mental health and addiction is taken into account, an elimination or reduction in the ban imposed below is warranted.
The Sole Arbitrator finds that due to lack of evidence, there is no possibility of issuing an order eliminating the period of Ineligibility and he concludes that period of Ineligibility is correctly determined and there should be no adjustment on appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 11 December 2015 that:
1.) The appeal filed by Ian Chan on 29 June 2015 is dismissed.
2.) The decision of the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada dated 23 June 2015 is confirmed.
3.) (…)
4.) (…)
5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
