CAS 2009/A/2001 Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) v. Lyle Clark, Glen Williams, Randall Martin and Nick Parr
Surf Boat
Disqualification of a team due to the anti-doping rule violation of one team member
Scope of articles 9 and 11 of the 2009 WADC
Application of article 9 WADC to teams
1. Articles 9 and 11 of the 2009 World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) are intended, between them, to exhaustively cover the situation of all sporting activities in which “individuals” or “teams” compete with no gap or lacuna so that if the relevant participant or participants do not fit within Article 11 then they fit within Article 9. Put colloquially, in other words, the two articles are intended to cover the “universe” of all relevant sporting endeavours. No room is left for something to be other than a team sport on the one hand or an individual sport on the other.
2. Article 9 of the 2009 WADC does not apply merely to individuals. It also applies to “teams” as commonly understood where the rules of the relevant competition do not permit substitution during the competition. It is only if substitution is permitted that the consequences for the team are to be determined by the application of Article 11 rather than Article 9.
On 4 November 2009 the CAS First Instance Tribunal decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Australian Surf Life Saving member Peter Atkins after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Stanozolol. Here the result of his Currumbin team in the race in question remained unchained and the crew members Lyle Clark, Glen Williams, Randall Martin and Nick Parr are deemed to comprise the winning team.
Hereafter in November 2009 the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) appealed the CAS First Instance Decision of 4 November 2009 with CAS Appeals Division. ASADA requested the Panel to set aside the CAS decision of 4 November 2009 and to disqualify the results of the Currumbin team and its members from the 2009 Australian Championships Men’s Open Surf Boat race.
In this case the Panel finds that it has jurisdiction to hear this appeal and establish that the Currumbin team members were in fact competing in an individual sport in accordance with Article 9 of the WADC 2009 regarding automatic disqualification of individual results. That “result” was the win by the Currumbin team and consequently Article 9 also requires that any medals or prizes awarded tot the team (or individual members of it) by virtue of the “result” obtained are to be forfeited.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 22 March 2010:
1.) The Court of Arbitration for Sport has jurisdiction to hear this Appeal.
2.) The Appeal is allowed.
3.) The decision of the CAS First Instance Tribunal dated 4 November 2009, namely:
“The result of the Currumbin Barbarians Surf Life Saving Club Men’s Open Surf Boat Team in the 2009 Australian Championship remains unchanged and the crew members Lyle Clark, Glen Williams, Randall Martin and Nick Parr are deemed to comprise the winning team”
be overturned.
4.) That the Currumbin Barbarians Surf Life Saving Club Men’s Open Surf Boat Team comprising Lyle Clark, Glen Williams, Randall Martin and Nick Parr are disqualified from the 2009 Australian Championships Men’s Open Surf Boat race, and any points, medals or other prizes won by the team or those members are forfeited.
5.) That each other open surf boat team which competed in, and finished legitimately, the 2009 Australian Championships Men’s Open Surf Boat race be moved one place forward (such that the team who finished second is now deemed to be the winner, the team who finished third is now deemed to have finished second, and so forth).
6.) That this Award be made public.
7.) (…).