- TAS 2010/A/2141 M. c. Fédération Royale Espagnole de Cyclisme (RFEC) & TAS 2010/A/2142 Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) c. M. & RFEC, sentence du 29 mars 2012
- CAS 2010/A/2141 M. vs Fédération Royale Espagnole de Cyclisme (RFEC)
CAS 2010/A/2142 UCI vs M. & Fédération Royale Espagnole de Cyclisme (RFEC)
Related cases:
- CAS 2010_A_2141 M. vs RFEC | UCI vs M. & RFEC - Partial Award 1
September 14, 2010 - CAS 2010_A_2141 M. vs RFEC | UCI vs M. & RFEC - Partial Award 2
June 8, 2011
- Cycling
- Doping (EPO)
- Dynamic effect of adherence to a regulation
- Impact of defrosting a sample on the analysis results
- Consequence of the late submission of the second opinion of the third party laboratory on the anti-doping procedure
- Principle and calculation of the fine
- Proportionality of the fine
In July 2009 the International Cycling Union (UCI) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Spanish cyclist M. after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO). On 30 April 2010 the RFEC deciced to impose to a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete including a fine.
Hereafter in June 2010 both the Athlete and the UCI appealed the RFEC decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Athlete argued that there was a violation of the right to be heard and that other procedural violations occurred in the first instance proceedings before the El Comite Nacional de Competicion y Disciplina Deportive (CNCDD) of the RFEC. The Athlete asserted - supported by expert witnesses - that there were departures of the applicable Rules and Standards and as a result that a false positive occurred.
Based on the evidence in this case the Panel finds that the test results are valid and show the presence of a prohibited substance in the Athlete’s samples. These samples were analyzed in accordance with the applicable Rules and Standards in the WADA accredited Madrid Lab.
Accordingly the Panel concludes that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation and holds that he failed to demonstrate that the alleged irregularities and departures could lead to an abnormal test result. The Panel deems that the late filing of the second opinion by the Lausanne Lab for introduction in the case does not justify the annulment of the testing result. Further the Panel upholds the calculation of the fine imposed on the Athlete in first instance which was disputed by the UCI.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 29 March 2012:
1.) The Athlete’s appeal is dismissed.
2.) The appeal filed by the UCI is admissible and partially upheld.
3.) The Athlete’s period of ineligibility shall begin on 31 July 31 2009 and shall end on 31 July 2011.
4.) All the results obtained by the Athlete from 26 June 2009 until 31 July 2009 must be canceled.
5.) The decision of 30 April 2010 rendered by the CNCDD of the RFEC is confirmed.
6.) (...)
7.) All other motions or prayers for relief of the parties are dismissed.
