CAS A1_2008 ASADA vs Nathan O'Neill

CAS A1/2008 Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority vs Nathan O'Neill

In March 2008 the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the cyclist Nathan O’Neill after his A and B samples – collected in the United States in August 2007 – tested positive for the prohibited substance Phentermine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Oceania Registry.

The Athlete admitted the use of the substance, accepted the test results and argued that there were grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence. He stated that he knew that the substance was prohibited in competition and he understood that 5 days would be more than enough time to clear this substance from his system.
Because of the positive test he was surprised that the substance could remain in his system for some 7 days.
Through research the Athlete demonstrated, sustained with evidence, that his use of phosphate tablets and bicarbonate capsules while using Phentermine effected the clearance time and consequently the Phentermine could be detected within a period of 10 days producing a positive test.

The Panel accepted the Athlete’s explanation and evidence and concludes that he established No Significant Fault or Negligence in this case for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 13 June 2018 that:

1.) Nathan O'Neill has breached Article 5.1 of the Anti-Doping Policy of Cycling Australia and has thereby committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation.
2.) Pursuant to Article 13.1 of the Anti-Doping Policy of Cycllng Australia, Nathan O’Neill is disqualified from his individual results obtained in the Tour of Elk Grove Event on 11 and 12 August 2007 with all consequences, incluqing forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes.
3.) Nathan O'Neill has established that he bears No Significant Fault or Negligence, within the meaning of Article 13.6.2 of the Anti-Doping Policy of Cycling Australla, in respect of the Violation referred to in 1 above.
4.) The period of ineligibility in respect of that Violation is reduced to a period of 15 months, commencing on 12 August 2007 and expiring at midnight on 11 November 2008.
5.) Pursuant to Article 11.10 of1he Anti-Doping Policy of Cycling Australla and clause 16 of the signed Order of Procedure herein, there be no order as to costs.

show »


CAS Miscellaneous Awards
13 June 2008
Spender, Jeffrey
Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) - Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
Adverse Analytical Finding / presence
Legal Terms
Burdens and standards of proof
CAS first instance case
Case law / jurisprudence
Circumstantial evidence
No intention to enhance performance
No Significant Fault or Negligence
Sole Arbitrator
Cycling (UCI) - International Cycling Union
Other organisations
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA)
Analytical aspects
B sample analysis
Half-life / excretion time of substance
Substance interaction
Doping classes
S6. Stimulants
Medical terms
Out-of-competition use
  • Legal
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period