Facts
The French Handball Federation (Fédération Française de Handball, FFHB) charges respondent M53 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on December 7, 2012, a sample was taken for a doping test. His sample tested positive on a metabolite of Cannabis, which is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. Cannabis is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent claims that because of his profession he is exposed to people who smoke cannabis. However this doesn't explain a concentration of this substance more than six times higher than the threshold of detection.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which respondent can't compete in competition or manifestation organized by the FFHB.
2. The decision, dated March 4, 2013, of the disciplinary committee of the FFHB will be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time served in voluntary suspension.
4. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

In March 2011 the International Biathlon Union (IBU) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Oksana Kvostenko after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance ephedrine.
The IBU notified the Athlete and the Biathlon Federation of Ukraine of the violation, but no provisional suspension was ordered by the Biathlon Federation of Ukraine. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the Doping Hearing Panel of the IBU.

The Athlete stated she fell ill with the flu in March 2011 while her breathing problems became serious and coughing deteriorated. The team doctor ordered her to take Broncholytin syrup as medication. The Athlete was not aware that this medication could only be used during training and had no intention to enhance her performance. The team doctor did not know that the medication was used during competition.

Considering the circumstance the Panel concludes that the Athlete had no intention to enhance sport performance but she also acted negligently due to she failed to research the ingredients before using the medication.
Therefore the Doping Hearing Panel decides to impose 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 13 March 2011.

Facts
The French Rugby Federation (Fédération Française de Rugby, FFR) charges respondent M52 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a rugby match on November 25, 2012, the respondent refused to sign the doping control papers.

History
The respondent claims that his refusal was because of an error in his name on the sheet.

Decision
1. The sanction will be a period of ineligibility of 2 years in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFR.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision, dated December 19, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFR will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Landgericht Köln, 28. Zivilkammer - 28 O (Kart) 38/05

On 10 August 2003 the Kenyan-American Athlete Bernard Lagat provided a sample in Germany during an out-of-competition doping test which was analysed at the German WADA-accredited laboratory in Cologne.

The Kenyan Athletics Federation (KAF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A-sample tested positive for the prohibited substance recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO). KAF notified the Athlete on 4 September 2003 of the positive test result and ordered a provisional suspension.

The Athlete requested the B-sample to be tested and hereafter on 29 September 2003 the result of the B-sample did not confirm the test result of the A-sample. This false positive test result of the A-sample was caused by an ineffective rhEPO test.
On 1 October 2003 the IAAF published the news on its webpage that result of the B-test did not confirm the result of the A-Test which is why the Athlete was eligible to run.

In October 2005 the Athlete filed a claim with the Cologne District Court in Germany against the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the International Association of Athletics Federation (IAAF).

The Athlete claimed compensation of € 155.000 because of loss of income in the second half of 2003, and further loss of income of € 200.000. In this legal dispute the Athlete appealed exclusively to German legal provisions and claimed that German law was applicable.

The Athlete argued that he had lost profit due to the false positive result of the A-sample and the provisional suspension. Also he claimed compensation because he was badly branded in the news due to the announcement and worldwide publication of the positive test result of his A-sample.

The Court concludes that the Athlete failed to show that any of his sponsors or potential sponsors abandoned him due to the news about his positive test result and his provisional suspension. Also after the provisional ban was lifted the Athlete could participate in the years from 2004 in sporting events in Germany without any further restrictions or losses of income.

The Court notes that the Athlete assumed that WADA, IAAF, or the KAF made the announcement of the Athlete’s positive test result. In fact it was a trainer of the Kenyan athletics team who mentioned the positive test result in an interview with a Kenyan newspaper. Also the Athlete failed to adequately illustrate his loss in profit for the sporting events in which he could not participate during the period he was provisionally suspended.

On 13 September 2006 the Cologne District Court in Germany rules that it has no international jurisdiction for the compensation claims of the Athlete. The Court decides that the Athlete’s claim is partially not permissible and otherwise without ground.

Facts
The French Handball Federation (Fédération Française de Handball, FFHB) charges respondent M51 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a handball meeting on December 15, 2012, a sample for doing test was taken. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis which is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. Cannabis is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent claims no tot have used the prohibited substance for enhancing sport performance. Inhalation of the smoke from a person who stays with her was the cause of the positive test. But the measured amount doesn't match the results of passive smoking of cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction will be a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized by the FFHB.
2. The earlier decision, dated March 11, 2013, of the disciplinary committee of the FFHB will be cancelled.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M50 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cyclo-cross on December 24, 2012, the respondent was selected for a doping control, however the respondent didn't attend the doping control.

History
Due to technical problems with his bike the respondent returned to his car for storing his bike, he didn't receive or see any message regarding being assigned for doping control.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision February 15, 2013, from the disciplinary committee of the FFC is cancelled.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M49 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on September 22, 2012, a sample was taken for doping control. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction will be a period of 6 months of ineligibility in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period all-ready served in voluntary suspension.
3. The decision of the disciplinary committee, dated December 19, 2012, will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération française d'athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M48 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event called "Grand Ménestrail" the respondent was selected for a doping test.

History
Despite messages and announcements the respondent didn't show up for the doping test.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 2 years in which the athlete can't take part in competition and manifestations organized by the FFA and related sports federation.
2. All his results gained at the athletics event are cancelled. Medals, points and prices are withdrawn.
3. The decision will start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M47 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event "la Tarbaise", on September 30, 2012, a sample was taken for a doping test. His sample tested positive on prednisolone which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. Prednisolone is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used a medicine to treat nasopharyngitis, this medicine contained the prohibited substance. He has a certificate for the use of this medicine.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision is published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Rugby Federation (Fédération Française de Rugby, FFR) charges respondent M46 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 18, 2012, a sample was taken for a doping test. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis which is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. Cannabis is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used cannabis the eve before the doping test, but it was not his attention to enhance his sport performance.

Decision
1. The sanction will be a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFR.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The earlier decision of the disciplinary committee of the FFR will be cancelled.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.