Related case:
SDRCC 2019 Kyle Borsa vs CCES - Appeal
August 9, 2019
The Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player Kyle Borsa (19) after his sample, provided on 16 October 2018, tested positive for the prohibited substance Higenamine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Doping Tribunal of the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC).
The Athlete gave a prompt admission and explained that he had used a pre-workout supplement Allmax Impact Igniter which he had purchased in a supplement retail store in September 2018. The Athlete was tested before without issues and had used different supplements from this store for about 4 years. He acknowledged that he didn't research the ingredients of this supplement nor did he consult any of the support available to him. He argued about the concentration of Higenamine detected and then compared to the concentration for those that are not reported, and he disputed the reliability of the analytical method to detect Higenamine in concentrations above 10ng/mL.
The CCES requested the Arbitrator to impose a sanction of 16 to 20 months on the Athlete and accepted that the violation was not intentional. The CCES contended that despite the Athlete had a reasonable level of anti-doping experience he failed in his duty to ensure that no prohibited substance entered his system. Further the Athlete failed to conduct the proper investigations to ensure that the Allmax Impact Igniter that he was taking did not contain any prohibited substances.
The Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete bears a significant degree of fault and holds that a modern athlete should know what he/she knows and does not know, and get help as needed. In many circumstances it would be difficult to accept an athlete at face value who says he/she did not know any better, despite being trained. The Arbitrator finds that the Athlete’s level of awareness was not reduced by what could fairly be described as a “careless but understandable mistake”.
Based on the Cilic subjective factors and the overall context including fairly comparable case law, the Arbitrator reduces the sanction to the lowest end of the “significant” degree of fault.
Therefore the SDRCC Arbitrator decides on 14 March 2019 to impose a 16 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 16 October 2018.
