UKAD 2020 Mark Jones vs UKAD - Appeal

UKAD 2019 UKAD vs Mark Jones
February 7, 2020

On 7 February 2020 the National Anti-Doping Panel decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the rugby player Mark Jones after he tested positive for Clenbuterol in a very low concentration.

In first instance the Panel concluded that the Athlete only provided a timely admission, he failed to establish how the substance had entered his system, nor that the positive test was the result of meat contamination.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the Decision with the National  Anti-Doping Appeal Panel.

The Athlete argued that UKAD and WADA had failed to grant him a reduction of the sanction based on his prompt admission. He believed that he bears No Significant Fault or Negligence due to the violation was not intentional and the result of meat contamination.

UKAD contended that the Athlete failed to produce corroborative evidence about his purchase of meat in bulk at a market in Cardiff nor was there any evidence of the existence of the trader who allegedly sold the meat. Also UKAD considered it implausible that contaminated meat from China might have been exported elsewhere, including to the UK, and thereafter causing an adverse finding particular in South Wales. Moreover the Athlete's social media records indicate that he had purchased supplement which were not all from necessarily reliable sources.

In its submission to the Appeal Panel WADA confirmed that there were no grounds to grant a significant reduction of the Athlete's sanction based on his prompt admission and No Significant Fault or Negligence. WADA found that the Athlete failed to establish how the substance had entered his system or established the source of the positive test.

Considering the evidence in this appeal and the arguments of the Parties the Appeal Panel concludes that UKAD and WADA were both entitled to exercise their discretion on the basis that this was a serious violation and that they were not satisfied by the Athlete's explanation that he had not been seriously at fault.

Therefore the Appeal Panel decides on 24 December 2020 to uphold the Decision of 7 February 2020 of the National Anti-Doping Commission, to dismiss the Athlete's appeal and to confirm the imposition of a 4 year period of ineligibility.

Original document

Parameters

Legal Source
National Decisions
Date
24 December 2020
Arbitrator
Murdock, Colin
Norris, William
Thompson, Blondel
Original Source
UK Anti-Doping (UKAD)
Country
United Kingdom
Language
English
ADRV
Adverse Analytical Finding / presence
Legal Terms
Burdens and standards of proof
Case law / jurisprudence
Circumstantial evidence
Commencement of ineligibility period
De novo hearing
Prompt / Timely Admission
Sport/IFs
Rugby (WR) - World Rugby
Other organisations
UK Anti-Doping (UKAD)
World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)
Laboratories
London, United Kingdom: Drug Control Centre
Analytical aspects
Atypical Finding (ATF)
Doping classes
S1. Anabolic Agents
Substances
Clenbuterol
Various
Amateur / club / recreational sport
Internet / Social media
Meat contamination
Voluntary doping tests
Document type
Pdf file
Date generated
3 February 2021
Date of last modification
23 January 2023
Category
  • Legal Source
  • 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
Origin