Related case:

TJD-AD 2018-139 Appeal Decision - Bodybuilding
December 29, 2018

In January 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Anastrozole, Drostanolone and Oxandrolone.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete gave a prompt admission and denied the intentional use of the substances. He stated that he is an amateur bodybuilder with lack of knowledge and requested for a reduced sanction based on his prompt admission.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. Further Rapporteur considers the Athlete's prompt admission and that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 27 September 2018 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 9 December 2017.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2018-138 Appeal Decision - Football
December 12, 2018

In December 2017 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Furosemide.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Rapporteur consideres that the Athlete had not applied for a TUE and that his violation was rather negligent then intentional due to no other prohibited substances were found in his sample.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 21 August 2018 by majority to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of sample collection, i.e. on 16 September 2017.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2019-026 Appeal Decision - Football
September 26, 2019

In June 2017 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported anti-doping rule violations against the football player after his A and B samples - collected on two separate occasions in March 2017 - tested positive for the prohibited substances Furosemide and Sibutramine.

After notification no provisional suspension was ordered while the Athlete filed a statement in his defence. The Athlete asserted that the source was a contaminated supplement that he had received from a friend. Yet, analysis of his supplements revealed no prohibited substances.

The TJD-AD Panel finds that the presence of the prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete's samples and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Panel considers that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substances had entered his system. He mentioned his medication on the Doping Control Form. By contrast he failed to mention any product that could contain the prohibited substances.

Finally the Panel regards that there had been delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 26 September 2018 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 12 March 2017.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2018-133 Appeal Decision - Football
December 12, 2018

In April 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence. The Athlete admitted the recreational use of the Cocaine and denied the intentional use of the substance.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of the prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and that it was used in a context unrelated to sport performance.

The Rapporteur deems that the Athlete acted negligently due to his lack of anti-doping education. Further the Rapporteur considers that the concentration found in his sample was consistent with the recreational use of the substance a few day before the Doping Control.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 26 September 2018 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 20 April 2018.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2019-187 Appeal Decision - Football
April 26, 2019

In April 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD)

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use. He explained that the substance only was used recreational and out-of-competition.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and deemed that the Athlete acted negligently.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 30 October 2018 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 25 April 2018.

In August 2017 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Furosemide.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and assumed that one of his supplements was contaminated. Analysis of his products in the Rio Laboratory confirmed the presence of Furosemide as contaminant in a supplement produced in a compounding pharmacy.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

In view of the evidence the Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and the result of a contaminated supplement with grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 19 October 2018 by majority to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 10 June 2017.

In September 2017 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Hydrochlorothiazide.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence. The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and could not explain how the substance entered his system. Also analysis of his supplements in a the Rio de Janeiro Lab revealed no prohibited substances.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's samples and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Rapporteur considers that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional nor grounds for a reduced sanction. Further the Rapporteur holds that there were substantial delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 20 November 2018 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 8 May 2017.

In February 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Refusal or failure to submit to sample collection during a competition in december 2017. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The TJD-AD Rapporteur establishes that the Athlete had signed the notification, yet thereupon intentionally failed to submit to sample collection. Further the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 13 January 2019 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 11 June 2018.

In January 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Fenoterol. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered ant the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation and explained with medical evidence that on the day of the sample collection he suffered from an asthma attack and had used medication as treatment that contained the prohibited substance.

The Athlete argued the he was unaware that his medication was prohibited, while he was tested before without issues. He requested to lift the provisional suspension and for a reduced sanction.

ABCD contended that the Athlete had acted negligently with his medication because he had failed to inform his football club about his asthma. Prior he had not applied for a TUE, nor applied for a TUE after the positive test result. Rather he had used the substance deliberately and intentionally for sport.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's samples and accordingly that he had committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and the result of the Athlete's use of his medication. In view of the Athlete's conduct the Rapporteur deems that he had acted with a degree of negligence. Further the substantial delays in the proceedings were considered not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 13 December 2018 to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 26 November 2017.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2019-199 Appeal Decision - Handball
May 17, 2019

In May 2018 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the handball player after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).

The Athlete gave a prompt admission, denied the intentional use of the substance and requested for a reduced sanction. She acknowledged that in December 2017 she had used Deca-Durabolin as self-medication because of her persistent knee injury and the pain she suffered.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation.

Following assessment of the Athlete's conduct the Rapporteur finds that the Athlete had acted with a high degree of negligence whereas she had received anti-doping education and received training in high level physical education.

Further the Rapporeur considers that the Athlete gave a prompt admission and that there had been delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 30 November 2018 to impose a 42 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 2 April 2018.