CAS 2021_ADD_33 IOC vs Chijindu Ujah

CAS 2021/ADD/33 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Chijindu Ujah

Related case:

World Athletics 2021 WA vs Chijindu Ujah
September 29, 2022


  • Athletics (sprint)
  • Doping (ostarine; SARMS S-23)
  • Burden, standard and means of proof
  • Consequences of the disqualification of an athlete’s results on the results of the relay team


1. It is sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) under Article 2.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Tokyo Olympics (ADR) inter alia if the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample is confirmed by the presence in the Athlete’s B Sample of the same Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers. Article 3.1 of the ADR provides that the burden is upon the IOC to establish to the comfortable satisfaction of the Sole Arbitrator that an ADRV has occurred. Facts relating to an ADRV may be established by any reliable means in accordance with Article 3.2 ADR including by admissions.

2. The relay team falls outside of the definition of a “Team Sport” as defined in the ADR. However, where awards are given to teams in a sport which is not a Team Sport, Article 11.3 ADR provides that, in addition to any consequences imposed on the individual athlete(s) found to have committed the ADRV, the rules of the relevant International Federation determine the consequences of such ADRV on the team. According to Article 11.1 of the World Athletics Anti-Doping Rules 2021, the relay team is automatically disqualified from the Tokyo Olympics with all resulting consequences including forfeiture of any titles, awards, medals, points and prize money.


In August 2021 the International Testing Agency (ITA), on behalf of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the British Athlete Chijindu Ujah after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Enobosarm (Ostarine).

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered by the IOC and by the Athletics Integrity Unit. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and the case was settled by Anti-Doping Division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS ADD) based on the Parties' written submissions.

The IOC contended that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's samples and accordinghly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. Consequently the IOC requested for the disqualification of the Athlete's results and its team members obtained at the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Games.

The Athlete accepted the test results and denied the intentional use of the substance. Following investigations he explained that a contaminated supplement was the source of the positive test results. Analysis of this supplement in question in a accredited laboratory revealed the presence of the prohibited substance, whereas it was not listed as ingredient on the product label.

The Sole Arbitrator concludes that the IOC has demonstrated to her comfortable satisfaction that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation. Consequently the Athlete's results and the results of his team mates are automatically disqualified.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 18 February 2022 that:

  1. The request for arbitration filed on 8 September 2021 by the International Olympic Committee is upheld.
  2. Mr Chijindu Ujah is found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation pursuant to Article 2.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXII Olympiad Tokyo 2020.
  3. Mr Chijindu Ujah is sanctioned with the disqualification of his results in the 4 x 100m sprint relay Final on 6 August 2021, and his results in the 100m sprint – together with the forfeiture of any medals, diplomas, points and prizes in accordance with Article 10.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules for the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
  4. The Great Britain men’s sprint relay team results in the 4 x 100m sprint relay Final on 6 August 2021 are disqualified together with the forfeiture of any medals, diplomas, points and prizes in accordance with Article 11.3 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules for the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
  5. World Athletics is requested to consider any further action within its own jurisdiction and pursuant to its own Rules including determining any period of ineligibility.
  6. The award is pronounced without costs, except for the ADD Court Office fee of CHF 1,000 (one thousand Swiss Francs) paid by the International Olympic Committee, which is retained by the ADD.
  7. (…).
  8. All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

Original document

Parameters

Legal Source
CAS Anti-Doping Division Awards
Date
18 February 2022
Arbitrator
Ahern, Susan
Original Source
Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
Country
United Kingdom
Language
English
ADRV
Adverse Analytical Finding / presence
Legal Terms
Burdens and standards of proof
Circumstantial evidence
Consequences to athletes / teams
First instance case
Rules & regulations IOC
Sole Arbitrator
Sport/IFs
Athletics (WA) - World Athletics
Other organisations
International Olympic Committee (IOC)
International Testing Agency (ITA)
Laboratories
Tokyo, Japan: Anti-Doping Laboratory
Analytical aspects
B sample analysis
Doping classes
S1. Anabolic Agents
Substances
Enobosarm (ostarine)
Selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs)
Various
Contamination
Disqualified competition results
Supplements
Document type
Pdf file
Date generated
31 October 2022
Date of last modification
24 November 2022
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