In February 2007 the Hellenic Basketball Federation has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance marihuana (cannabis).
After notification the Player stated he had smoked marihuana the night before the game and that he had no intention to enhance his performance. The Hellenic Basketball Federation suspended the Player immediately and decided a two year period of ineligibility.
In July 2007 The Greek Supreme Council for the Resolution of Sports Disputed reduced this sanction to one year. These decisions were not communicated to FIBA.

In November 2007 the Player appealed against this sanction to the FIBA and filed a statement in his defence. The Player argued that a period of ineligibility of three months is the appropriate sanction in his case and that this period has already been served by him.
The FIBA Disciplinary Panel decides not to impose a sanction for purposes of FIBA competitions because the Hellenic Federation failed to inform the FIBA of the sanctions imposed in Greece, therefore FIBA could not impose an own FIBA sanction. Also FIBA has no authority to reduce the sanction imposed in Greece for Greek purposes.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping Limited (“UKAD”) Charged Jack Gibbs (the “Athlete”) for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules. On December 8, 2012, the Athlete competed a competition match. After the competition, the Athlete was notified that he would be required to provide a urine sample for Doping Control purposes. He did not comply with this request for sample provision, citing medical and personal reasons.

On January 23, 2013, the Athlete, via email, admitted that he refused to provide a sample for fear that he would test positive for cannabis. The Athlete did not seek any mitigation of sanction for that reason the standard sanction must therefore be imposed.

Decision
1. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation in accordance with ADR 2.3 has been established;
2. A period of Ineligibility of two years shall be the consequence imposed pursuant to Anti-Doping Rule 10.3;
3. That period of Ineligibility is deemed to have commenced as from January 8, 2013, and will end at midnight on January 7, 2015;
4. The Athlete’s status during this period of Ineligibility shall be as set out in Article 10.10:

Appeal
The Athlete, GBWBA, the International Wheelchair Basketball Federation and the World Anti-Doping Agency have a right of appeal against this decision.

The International Basketball Federation (FIBA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
After notification the Player admitted the anti-doping rule violation and accepted a provisional suspension. He filed a statement in his defence and did not attend the hearing.
Without intention to enhance of sport performance the FIBA Disciplinary Panel decides a six month period of ineligibility.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping Organization ("UKAD") charged Laurent Irish (the "Athlete") for an omission of the Anti-Doping Rules (ADR). On November 13, 2012, the Athlete provided an in-competition sample. His sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 11-nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (cannabis). On December 11, 2012, the Athlete admitted the Charge in writing. He also waived his right to have the B sample tested. On December 19, 2012, the Athlete was interviewed by UK Anti-Doping. The Athlete sought mitigation for elimination or reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for specified substances under specified circumstances.

History
The Athlete asserted that he ingested the cannabis at a time when he was out-of-competition. UK Anti-Doping accepts this assertion and in particular accepts that the explanation is consistent with the concentration of cannabis detected in the Sample. UK Anti-Doping notes that cannabis is not believed to be of performance-enhancing benefit for the sport of basketball.

Decision
1. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation in accordance with ADR 2.1 has been established;
2. A period of ineligibility of ten weeks shall be the Consequence imposed pursuant to Anti-Doping Rule 10.4;
3. That period of Ineligibility is deemed to have commenced on November 26, 2012 and will expire at midnight on 3 February 2013; and
4. The Athlete’s status during this period of Ineligibility shall be as set out in Article 10.10:

Related Case:

CAS 2012/A/2756 James (Jim) Armstrong vs World Curling Federation

The Wold Curling Federation (WCF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Parathlete James Armstrong after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Tamoxifen. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement with evidence in his defence and was heard for the WCF Case Hearing Panel.

The Athlete explained he had moved from the West Coast to Ontario after his wife died of breast cancer in 2009. All his prescription medications were moved in the same box, including those belonging to his wife.

Occasionally when he became short of medications he would use the medication in this box and therefore unwittingly contamination occurred of his medication with old prescribed Tamoxifen medication of his deceased wife.

The Panel found that Athlete acted negligently in storing, re packaging and reusing medicine containers with or without their contents (in this case Tamoxifen), particularly containers of drugs prescribed for another person. The Panel is not convinced that in this case the level of Tamoxifen detected is compatible with a simple contamination but as a residue of and ingestion of the substance.

Concluding that the Athlete was seriously negligently, but without evidence of intent or actual enhancement of performance exists, the WCF Case Hearing Panel decides to impose an 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping Organisation ("UKAD") charged David Cookson (the "Athlete") for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On 12 August 2012, the Athlete provided an in-competition sample for doping control purposes. His sample tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (“MHA”), MHA is a specified substance. On September 4, 2012, the Athlete admitted the Charge in writing. He also waived his right to have the B Sample tested.

Consideration panel
The Athlete has a degree of fault, but it is less than a well-educated athlete with access to a support network of doctors and nutritionists. Accordingly, UK Anti-Doping believes that a period of Ineligibility of six (6) months is the appropriate Consequence. The Athlete accepts this.

Decision
UK Anti-Doping has issued this Decision, pursuant to ADR 7.5.4, which records that:
1. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation in accordance with ADR 2.1 has been established;
2. A period of Ineligibility of six months shall be the Consequences imposed pursuant to Anti-Doping Rule 10.4;
3. That period of Ineligibility is deemed to have commenced on 31 August 2012 and will expire at midnight on February 28, 2013; and
4. The Athlete’s status during this period of Ineligibility shall be as set out in Article 10.10:

The World Confederation of Billiard Sports (WCBS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Acebutolol.
Respondent had no Therapeutic Use Exemption. He was notified of the doping violation, accepted a provisional suspension and did not request analysis of the B sample.
Respondent stated he used the substance as medicine prescribed by his personal physician for the purpose of medical treatment, and without the intention to enhance sport performances.

The WCBS Doping Hearing Panel decides a four month period of ineligibility, beginning May 13, 2010. Additional the Panel decides the automatic disqualification of all competitive results obtained from March 27 to May 13, 2010, including forfeiture of medals, points and prizes.

By letter dated 14 May 2012 the UK Anti-Doping ("UKAD") charged Ian Burns (the "respondent") with: Possession of: testosterone (Sustanon and/or Cidotestin) and/or nandrolone (Deca) between September 2010 and September 2011; and/or testosterone (Sustanon), nandrolone (Deca), stanozolol, methandienone (aka Dianabol), human growth hormone, HCG and/or tamoxifen, on or around September 22, 2011; and/or use or Attempted Use of: testosterone (Sustanon and/or Cidotestin) and/or nandrolone (Deca) between September 2010 and September 2011; and/or stanozolol and/or methandienone (Dianabol) during or about August 2011; and/or 6.2.3.testosterone, nandrolone, stanozolol, methandienone, hGH, HCG and/or tamoxifen.

History
Unusually the Panel has been provided with evidence from the police. The evidence relied on by UK Anti-Doping in this case is set out in the witness statements of PC Christopher Woollett, of the Durham Constabulary. On 21 September 2011, PC Woollett obtained a warrant from the North Durham Magistrates’ Court pursuant to section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, to search for controlled drugs at (the Respondent’s home address). PC Woollett and seven other police officers went to execute that search warrant the next day, September 22, 2011. Boxes with prohibited substances were found. At first the respondent admits that the prohibited substances found in his,house are his later he claims that they belong to someone else.

Decision
1. The Respondent has committed the following anti-doping rule violations;
2. Possession, in violation of IAAF Rule 32.2(f), of: testosterone and/or nandrolone between September 2010 and September 2011; and/or methandienone, stanozolol, testosterone, nandrolone, hGH, HCG and/or tamoxifen on or around September 22, 2011; and/or
48.1.2. Use or Attempted Use, in violation of IAAF Rule 32.2(b), of:
testosterone and/or nandrolone between September 2010 and September 2011; and/or methandienone (aka Dianabol) and/or stanozolol during or about August 2011; and/or methandienone, stanozolol, testosterone, nandrolone, hGH, HCG and/or tamoxifen on or around 22 September 2011;
3 The Respondent’s results obtained by the Respondent from September 1, 2010 to 31 August 31, 2011 are hereby disqualified, in accordance with IAAF Rule 40.8;
4. the Respondent is hereby made the subject of a period of ineligibility of four years deemed to have started to run on 19 May 2012. This extended period is imposed by the Panel in the exercise of its discretion under IAAF Rule 40.6. The period of Ineligibility shall run from 00:01 am 19 May 2012 being the time and date of the Athlete’s provisional suspension and so shall end at 00:01 am 19 May 2016.
During the period of Ineligibility the Respondent must not participate in any Competition or activity, including coaching, other than in authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs, which are authorized or organized by the IAAF or any Area Association or Member or Signatory or in competitions authorized or organized by his sport.The Respondent will remain subject to Testing during the period of Ineligibility.

Rights of Appeal
In accordance with IAAF Rule 42 the following shall have the right to appeal against this decision to the National Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal: the Athlete, UK Anti-Doping, UK Athletics and WADA. Any party that wishes to exercise such rights must file a Notice of Appeal with the National Anti-Doping Panel Secretariat no later than 21 days from the date of receipt of this decision, in accordance with the NADP.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping Organization (UKAD) charges Zbyszko Kienast (the "Athlete") for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules ("ADR"). On November 26, 2011, the Athlete competed in the BWLA London and South-East Championships. Following the completion of the competition, the Athlete was required to provide a urine sample for analysis. The analysis revealed the presence of carbon isotope ratios for testosterone, androsterone and etiocholanone that were significantly different from that of the endogenous reference steroid 11-ketoeticholanolone, and thereby revealed the presence of exogenous testosterone which is included on the prohibited list 2011. On January 2, 2012, the Athlete responded to the Notice of Charge. The Athlete stated: “I accept the charge. I do not wish to appeal.” For the avoidance of doubt, by so doing, the Athlete admitted the charge and acceded to the consequences. He also thereby accepted that he was subject to the jurisdiction of BWLA, and subject to the BWLA Anti-Doping Rules.

Decision
1. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation contrary to Article 2.1 and 2.2 has been established;
2. A period of ineligibility of two years is imposed;
3. That period of Ineligibility is deemed to have commenced as from December 22, 2011, and therefore will end at midnight on December 21, 2013.
4. The Athlete’s status during this period of Ineligibility shall be as set out in Article 10.10.

Facts
The UK Anti-Doping Organization ("UKAD") charged John Donnelly (the "Athlete") for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules ("ADR")
On 9 November 2012, the Athlete provided an in-competition sample for doping control. His sample showed the presence of benzoylecgonine (a metabolite of cocaine) which is a prohibited substance. The Athlete was also provisionally suspended, effective from November 27, 2012. The Charge notified the Athlete that he had until Friday December 7, 2012, to respond to the Charge. No response was received. On February 4, 2013, the Athlete verbally confirmed that he accepted the charge and acceded to the consequences specified by UK Anti-Doping.

Decision
1. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation in accordance with ADR 2.1 has been established in relation to the prohibited substance;
2. A period of ineligibility of two years shall be the consequences imposed pursuant to Anti-Doping Rule 10.2;
3. That period of Ineligibility is deemed to have commenced as from November 27, 2012, and will end at midnight on November 26, 2014; and
4. The Athlete’s status during this period of Ineligibility shall be as set out in Article 10.10.
During the period of Ineligibility, the athlete can't participate in any capacity in a Competition, Event or other activity (other than authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs) organized, convened, authorized or recognized by his sport.