Swiss Federal Court 4A_80_2017 Alexei Lovchev vs IWF
Related case
CAS 2016_A_4632 Alexei Lovchev vs IWF
December 1, 2016
On 13 May 2016 the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) Panel decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Russian Athlete Alexei Lovchev after his A sample tested positive for the prohibited substance ipamorelin in a very low concentration. Also later conducted analysis showed the presence of the substance ipamoreling in the Athlete’s B sample.
In June 2016 the Athlete appealed the IWF Panel decision of 13 May 2016 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete argued that the IWF had failed to establish to the standard of comfortable satisfaction that the substance in his sample was ipamorelin as distinct from some other benign substance.
The CAS Panel noted that there was, underlying the debate between the parties, a single (but decisive) question. Have the IWF proved to the standard of comfortable satisfaction pursuant to Article 2.1 IWF ADP that the substance found in the Appellant’s urine was Ipamorelin (or its metabolites) as distinct from some other (non-prohibited) substance?
Because the Athlete previously was claiming that the Montreal Laboratory reported a false positive the Montreal Laboratory repeated the analysis showing again the presence of the substance ipamoreling in the Athlete’s B sample.
The CAS Panel observed that the main thrust of the Athlete’s argument was that this matter could and should be resolved one way or another by a further analysis bearing on the detected substance’s ion structure. The Panel noted that the Athlete appears to have sought various and inconsistent explanations for the AAF reported by the Montreal Laboratory supported by the testimony of three experts.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decided on 1 December 2016 to dismiss the Athlete's appeal and to confirm the IWF decision of 13 May 2016.
Hereafter the Athlete appealed the CAS decision with the Swiss Federal Court.
The Athlete asserted that the CAS Panel breached his right to be heard, his right for equal treatment and his right for a fair trial as violation of the Swiss Ordre Public. The Athlete argued that the CAS decision was based on a false positive concentration in his samples for the prohibited substance ipamoreling. Also CAS rejected the Athlete’s request to conduct further analysis on his B-sample by the Montreal Laboratorium with another Testing Method.
The Swiss Federal Court considers the Athlete’s arguments and concludes that he failed to demonstrate that the CAS decision was an infringement of the Ordre Public.
Therefore the Swiss Federal Court decides on 25 July 2017 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.
