Related case:
UKAD 2019 UKAD vs Adrian Canaveral
October 7, 2019

In October and in November 2016 the UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported two anti-doping rule violations against the weightlifter Adrian Canaveral after his samples, provided in September and in October 2016, tested positive for the prohibited substances: 19-norandrosterone, Clomiphene, Stanozolol, Tamoxifen and Methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete gave a prompt admission and without a hearing he accepted a 4 year period of ineligibility rendered by UKAD. Because the Athlete’s second violation was committed before he received notice about the first violation UKAD considers the two anti-doping rule violations as a single first anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the Rules.

Therefore UKAD decides on 27 June 2017 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the second sample collection, i.e. on 9 October 2016.

In January 2017 United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Carl Lamb after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cocaine.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete gave a prompt admission, filed a statement in his defence and accepted the reduced sanction rendered by UKAD.

The Athlete explained that the violation was non intentional and out-of-competition when he had been drinking with friends the day before the sample collection. UKAD establish that the substance was taken out-of-competition, in a context unrelated to sport performance.

Therefore UKAD decides on 26 July 2017 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 10 December 2016.

In October 2016 United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Chinu Sandhu after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance stanozolol.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the National Anti-Doping Panel.

The Athlete did not challenge the test results and stated that the probable source of the prohibited substance is the supplement Myprotein he had used. He mentioned the supplement on the Doping Control Form and had researched the product on the internet before using. Because of the cost the Athlete did not conduct tests of the supplements nor offered these to UKAD to conduct these tests.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete has not proved to their comfortable satisfaction that the violation was unintentional because he did not establish that the prohibited substance entered his system through using a supplement from an apparently reputable supplier which turned out to be contaminated.

Therefore National Anti-Doping Panel decides on 27 February 2017 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 14 October 2016.

In January 2017 the United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Donald Kudangirana after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances drostanolone and testosterone. After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by UKAD.

The Athlete explained that only his use of Mutant Mass Muscle Gain protein supplement drink could have caused the positive test result. Analysis in the laboratory of the Athlete’s supplement in question confirmed it contained testosterone, nandrolone and drostanolone.

In this case UKAD considers the Athlete’s prompt admission, the seriousness of the violation, his degree of fault and grounds to impose a reduced sanction. Therefore with approval of WADA UKAD decides on 5 December 2017 to impose a 3 year and 7 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on de date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 30 January 2017.

In April 2016 UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) received notification that the UK Border Force had seized a package from India addressed to the Athlete containing ampules with testosterone and nandrolone tablets. Also in May 2016 the Athlete refused to provide a sample to an UKAD doping control officer during an out-of-competition test at his house.

As a result in August 2016 UKAD reported two anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete for the attempted use of prohibited substances and for his refusal to submit to sample collection.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard by UKAD.
The Athlete gave a prompt admission for the two violations and stated that he ordered the steroids for his own personal use.

UKAD consideres the two charges against the Athlete as one single first anti-doping rule violation and the sanction impose shall be based on the anti-doping rule violation that carries the more severe sanction.
With the Athlete’s level of fault UKAD decides on 4 October 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 1 August 2016.

In November 2015 UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Jonathan Slowey after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cocaine.

Previously in July 2010 a 4 month period of ineligibility was imposed on the Athlete for the use of cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the National Anti-Doping Panel.

The Athlete gave a prompt admission to UKAD for the cocaine violation and stated that he had used alcohol and cocaine out-of-competition in the weeks before the competition in September 2015 without intention to enhance his performance.
The Athlete explained, sustained by evidence and expert witnesses, that he suffered from severe personal problems; struggled with cocaine and alcohol; and was involved in a court case having been charged with an attempted assault. Also the Athlete underwent a medical treatment in a rehabilitation centre but wished to continue to respond to the charges and to attend the hearings.

UKAD accepted that the Athlete did not use cocaine to enhance his sport performance and that the Athlete has established when and how the substance entered his system.
The Sole Arbitrator accepts the Athlete’s explanation and finds considering the circumstances in this case that the Athlete bore No Significant Fault or Negligence for the committed anti-doping violation.

Therefore based on the Athlete’s degree of fault the Sole Arbitrator of the National Anti-Doping Panel decides on 9 September 2016 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 26 September 2015.

In January 2016 UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Kurt Clabby for evading or failing to submit to sample collection.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he waived his right to attend the hearing of the National Anti-Doping Panel.

The Athlete was selected at a training in December 2015 by UKAD to provide a sample for drug testing. Attempts were made to locate the Athlete and to contact him by phone but the Athlete failed to report to the doping control station and did not provide a sample.

The Athlete confirmed that he was present at the training and stated that he needed to leave the training immediately in order to fulfill his employment obligations. He had believed that he had not other option but to leave to attend to work and that he was not able to ignore or fail to comply with an instruction to attend the emergency call out.

The Tribunal concludes that the Athlete knew that he had been selected to provide a sample for testing; deliberately avoided the doping control station; and did so to evade being tested.
Without grounds to reduce the sanction the National Anti-Doping Panel decides on 20 December 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 28 January 2016.

In July 2016 UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Lee Mapals after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances nandrolone and oxymethelone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The Athlete gave a prompt admission for the intentional use of these substances without providing any further information. Considering the Athlete’s level of fault UKAD decides on 26 August 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 8 July 2016.

In October 2015 UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) was informed about the conviction of the Athlete from the Guernsey Courts for the import of Class C drugs (Steroids) in June 2014 and the Athlete was sentenced to 100 hours of community service as an alternative to 4 months imprisonment.

Because of the conviction UKAD reported in June 2016 an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete for the attempted use of the prohibited substances testosterone, nandrolone, trenbolone and drostanolone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The Athlete admitted the anti-doping violation and therefore UKAD decides on 30 June 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 1 June 2016.

In October 2016 United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Michael Ellerton after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances prednisolone and prednisone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete gave a prompt admission and explained the presence of prednisolone and prednisone to his oral ingestion of the medication of a friend in order to treat mouth ulcers. He used the medication without undertaking any research into its ingredients or any further checks. He stated that he had ingested the medication around five days before the Event and provided details of his dosage. UKAD obtained scientific evidence that corroborated the timing and dosage of the Athlete’s ingestion of his friend’s medication.

UKAD accepted that the Athlete has not acted intentionally and invited the Athlete to apply for a retroactive TUE. The TUE Committee rejected in November 2016 the application due to the fact that the Athlete had self-medicated using another person’s prescription medication.

Without a valid TUE UKAD considers the Athlete’s prompt admission and degree of fault in this case and decides on 24 February 2017 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 11 September 2016.