In May 2015 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance SARM S22: Enobosarm (Ostarine)

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the CCES.

Considering the Athlete's prompt admission the CCES decides on 19 June 2015 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 25 March 2015.

In April 2015 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone.

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the CCES.

Considering the Athlete's prompt admission the CCES decides on 19 June 2015 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 28 March 2015.

In April 2015 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone.

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the CCES.

Considering the Athlete's prompt admission the CCES decides on 19 June 2015 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 18 March 2015.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping organization (UKAD) charges Dan Steevens, the athlete, for an Anti-Doping rule (ADR) violation. On January 29, 2014, UKAD attempted to collect an out-of-competition sample, the athlete refused.

History
The athlete admitted the Charge.
UKAD issued a decision dated August 26, 2014 (the UKAD Decision) confirming the commission of an anti-doping rule violation by the athlete, imposing a period of ineligibility of 21 months (to run from 1 March 2014), and ordering the disqualification of all individual results
obtained by Mr Steevens since the date of the violation, along with ail resulting consequences including forfeiture of any medals, titles, points and prizes. [The Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) made a recommendation for reducing the sanction to 21 months for assisting with its inquiries].
On September 15, 2014, the athlete appealed against this decision.

Decision
The parties came to an agreement and the UKAD issued a consent order:
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 21 months.
- The period of ineligibility starts from January 29, 2014.
- Results obtained on and after January 29, 2014, are cancelled.
- Medals, titles, points and prizes are withdrawn.

Facts
The French Concours Landais (Fédération Française de la Course Landaise, FFCL) charges Respondent M13 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a concourse on August 21, 2014, the Respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of betamethasone which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list. It is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The disciplinary committee of the FFCL had decided not to take further action because of her medical reason.
The respondent had used medication, containing the prohibited substance, to treat to treat bruises and a hematoma on the right arm from which he suffered, resulting from an accident during previous competition in which he had been the victim. He has medical proof and statements for this fact.
The panel considers, based on his medical file, that the use of the medication is justifiable.

Decision
1. No further action will be taken.
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M12 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a bodybuilding event on May 10, 2014, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of bumetanide which is a prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list. It is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The disciplinary committee had sanctioned the respondent with a period of ineligibility of 30 months in which she was excluded from competition and activities organized by the FFHMFAC. Results acquired on May 10, 2014, were cancelled. Points, prices and medals were withdrawn.
The respondent did not provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered her body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 2 years in which he is excluded from competition and activities organized by the FFHMFAC.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time fulfilled in provisional suspension and the time already fulfilled by the sanction of the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC.
3. The decision of the disciplinary committee will be reformed.
4. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

TAS 2014/A/3475 Charline Van Snick c. Fédération Internationale de Judo

CAS 2014/A/3475 Charline Van Snick vs International Judo Federation

• Judo
• Dopage (cocaïne)
• Responsabilité objective en cas de présence de produits dopants dans l’organisme d’un athlète
• Standard de la prépondérance des probabilités selon la jurisprudence du TAS
• Sabotage par un tiers

1. Les articles 2.1.1 et 2.1.2 du CMA et du RAD FIJ ainsi que la jurisprudence constante du TAS retiennent que le sportif est responsable de la présence de produits dopants dans son organisme. Dès lors, la prise d’une substance interdite est établie, son intention de se doper et sa culpabilité sont présumées. Le sportif bénéficie de la présomption d’innocence tant que la présence d’une substance prohibée dans son organisme n’est pas établie. Le sportif est donc soumis à un système de responsabilité objective, système qui s’impose lorsque l’équité sportive est en jeu.

2. La jurisprudence constante du TAS considère qu’un athlète peut établir comment la substance spécifiée s’est retrouvée dans son organisme suivant le standard de la prépondérance des probabilités. Partant, le tribunal doit être convaincu que l’explication – ou les thèses évoquées – du sportif concernant la présence de la substance spécifiée est plus probable qu’improbable ou autrement dit, qu’il y a une probabilité que ces circonstances se soient produites supérieure ou égale à 51%.

3. Le TAS peut prendre en considération la totalité des éléments de fait et de preuve avancés par l’athlète afin de se prononcer sur la probabilité d’un sabotage par un tiers mal intentionné au moyen d’une substance interdite introduite dans l’échantillon d’urine.

In December 2013 the Executive Committee of the International Judo Federation (IJF) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Belgium Athlete Charline Van Snick after she tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine.

Hereafter in January 2014 the Athlete appealed the decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a reduced sanction.

In view of the evidence the Panel finds that the presence of a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's samples and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete had not voluntarily nor intentional consumed Cocaine before and during the competition, nor for recreational purposes, nor in two other scenario's.

Following assessment the Panel considers the scenario by a malicious third party the most likely scenario on the balance of probabilities. As a result the Panel deems that the Athlete acted without Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 4 July 2014 that:

• The 2 year period of eniligibility imposed on the Athlete is annulled.
• The Athlete's results obtained on August 26, 2013, are cancelled. Points, medals and prizes are withdrawn.
• The IJF will pay a contribution to the legal costs and procedure of the athlete.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping organization (UKAD) charges Lewis Graham, the player, for an Anti-Doping rule (ADR) violation. On February 17, 2015, UKAD collected an out-of-competition sample for a doping test. Analysis of the sample did show the presence of nandrolone. Nandrolone is a prohibited substance according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list.

History
The player does not dispute that he committed the ADRV and no issue of jurisdiction arises. However, he argues that the otherwise applicable four year period of ineligibility should be reduced on the basis that there was no intent to commit the ADRV and furthermore that there was no significant fault or negligence. After beings tested positive he did his own research and determined the following probabilities:
- contaminated supplements that he had taken along with a high quantity of coconut oil;
- the fact that he had been tested directly after High Intensity Interval Training; and
- his use of pure coconut oil on his skin, on his food and as an additive.
The panel concludes that the player had no satisfactory explanation how the prohibited substance had entered his body. He had not mentioned all the supplements he had taken on the doping control form. Also the manner in which he had checked the ingredients was doubtful. The player had not established that his positive test was unintentionally.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 4 years.
- The period of ineligibility is adapted to his provisional suspension which commenced on March 11, 2015. Accordingly, the period of ineligibility will run until March 10, 2019.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M11 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a bodybuilding event on May 10 and June 1, 2014, samples were taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the samples showed the presence of a metabolites of stanozolol and metabolites of nandrolone which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list.

History
The disciplinary committee had sanctioned the respondent with a period of ineligibility of four years, for the first doping control, in which he was excluded from competition and activities organized by the FFHMFAC and other French sport federations. Results obtained on May 10, 2014, are cancelled. Points, medals and prizes are withdrawn.
Also for the second doping control, the disciplinary committee had sanctioned the respondent with a period of ineligibility of four years in which he was excluded from competition and activities organized by the FFHMFAC and other French sport federations. Results obtained on June 1, 2014, are cancelled. Points, medals and prizes are withdrawn.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 4 years in which he is excluded from competition and activities organized by the FFHMFAC.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time fulfilled in provisional suspension and the time already fulfilled by the sanctions of the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC.
3. The decisions of the disciplinary committee will be reformed.
4. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
French Federation of Karate and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Karaté et Disciplines Associées, FFKDA) charges respondent M10 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a contest on April 7, 2013, a sample was taken for a doping test purposes. Respondent was unable to produce enough urine for a valid sample, he had left the doping control area.

History
Considering that by a decision of July 15, 2013, of the disciplinary committee of the FFKDA whom inflicted the punishment not to participate for one year in the competitions and sporting events organized or authorized by the FFKDA, secondly, to cancel individual results obtained on April 7, 2013, with all the consequences in sport arising; withdrawal of points, medals and prizes.
A judge of the appeal committee, acting on the application form from the respondent, suspended the decision of the disciplinary committee.
The respondent claims that because of dehydration for having his weight under control for his fight, he was unable to produce more urine even after drinking water. He did not wait because he wanted to catch his train.
The panel considers leaving the doping control as a big fault. The penalty can be a period of ineligibility of two years. Considerin the respondent did produce urine although not enough the period of ineligibility can be reduced.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFKDA and related French sport federations.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period fulfilled by the sanction of the disciplinary committee till ended by the appeal commitee.
3. The decision of the appeal committee will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.