On 10 June 2015 la Fédération Française de Cyclisme (FFC) – the French Cycling Federation – decided to impose a 4 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent M58 for his failure to show at the Doing Control Station to provide a sample for drug testing at a cycling competition on 11 April 2015 .

Hereafter in July 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M58.
In his defence the Respondent disputed the validity of the authorization of the Doping Control Officers and the notification procedure for the Doping Control at the competition.

The AFLD rules that the Doping Control Officers were duly authorized and the notification procedure was valid under the Rules. The AFLD finds that a rider has an obligation to check after his arrival whether he is selected for Doping Control and the list with selected riders was displayed at the podium.
The Respondent admitted he failed to check the list with selected riders, he argued the he had acted in good faith at het competition and requested the AFLD to discharge the prosecution against him or to confirm the FFC decision of 10 June 2015.

Considering the Respondent’s negligence the AFLD concludes that he was at fault for his no show to provide a sample. Therefore the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to reform the FFC decision of 10 June 2015 and to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent M58 less the period already served and starting on 10 June 2015.

On 4 May 2015 la Fédération Française de Basket-Ball (FFBB) – the French Basketball Federation – decided to impose a 8 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent M57 after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis in an concentration above the WADA threshold.

Hereafter in June 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M57.
The Respondent admitted the violation and stated, sustained by his medical file, that had used cannabis the day before the sample collection as treatment for a knee injury he suffered. He expressed his regret, he argued that the use of cannabis was without intention to enhance his performance and that he is retiring his sports career due to his health problem .

Considering the circumstances in this case the AFLD decides on 22 October to reform the FFBB decision of 4 May 2015 and to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent M57 starting on the date of the provisional suspension.

In March 2015 la Fédération française d'athlétisme (FFA) – the French Athletics Federation – has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent M56 after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances prednisone and prednisolone.

Because the Respondent was no member of the FFA the AFLD obtained automatically jurisdiction to open disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent. After notification of the violation the Respondent filed a statement with medical evidence in her defence.
The Respondent stated that she non intentionally used prescribed medication as treatment for the rheumatoid arthritis she suffered and she mentioned her medication on the Doping Control Form.

The AFLD accepts the Respondent’s statement and medical evidence and concludes that the use of the medication with the prohibited substances were justified.
Therefore the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to to discharge the Respondent M56 from further prosecution.

On 11 May 2015 la Fédération Française de Pelote Basque (FFPB) – the French Pelota Federation – decided to impose a warning on the Respondent M55 after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance heptaminol.

Hereafter in June 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M55.
The Respondent admitted the violation and stated, sustained by medical evidence, that he non intentionally had used prescribed medication containing the substance as treatment for his hemorrhoid he suffered.

Considering the evidence the AFLD concludes that the use of the medication was justified but that the Respondent also had acted negligently. Therefore the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to annul the FFPB decision of 11 May 2015 and to impose a 6 month period of ineglibility starting on the date of the notification of the decision to the Respondent M55.

On 10 April 2015 la Fédération Française de Football (FFF) – the French Football Federation – decided to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent M54 after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis in a concentration above the WADA threshold.

Hereafter in May 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M54.
Because the Respondent failed to file a statement in his defence the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent, less the period already served and starting on the date of the notification of the FFF decision to the Respondent M54, i.e. on 20 April 2015.

On 12 September 2014 la Fédération Française de Savate Boxe Française et Disciplines Associées (FFSBFDA) - The French Federation for Savate, French Boxing and Associated Disciplines - decides to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent M53 after his sample tested positivie for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).

Because the FFSBFDA Appeal Body failed to handle the Respondent’s case within the time limit the AFLD obtained under the Rules in October 2014 automatically jurisdiction to proceed with the case. In the meantime the Respondent had filed an appeal with the French Administrative Tribunal in Melun which decided on 25 November 2014 to suspend the imposed sanction and on 14 April 2015 to annul the FFSBFDA decision of 12 September 2014.

In his defence the Respondent disputed the validity of the sample collection procedure and the authorization of the Doping Control Officer. The AFLD ruled that these were valid and during the proceedings the Respondent admitted that in the week before the sample collection he had used several times the supplement Jack 3D purchased on the internet. He stated that he used the product without intention to enhance his performance and he argued that he had researched the ingredients of the supplement before using the supplement.

The AFLD did not accept the Respondents statement and concludes that he had acted negligently and had used the supplement jack 3D with the intention to enhance his performance.
Therefore the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to impose a 1 year period of inegligibility less the period already served and starting on the date of the notification of the decision to the Respondent M53.

On 11 March 2015 la Fédération Française de Rugby (FFR) - the French Rugby Federation - decided to impose a 4 year period of inegligibility on the Respondent M52 after his sample tested positive for prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone and 19-noretiocholanolone (metabolites of nandrolone).

Considering the respondent’s objections and arguments against the imposed sanction the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) decided in May 2015 to open disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M52.

In his defence the Respondent M52 filed several objections against the applied Rules; requested for a reduced sanction; and disputed the validity of the sample collection procedure. He admitted the use of the prohibited substance nandrolone, not to improve sport performance but instead used as treatment for his back pain he suffered for several years.

The AFLD accepts the respondent’s argument that the 2015 WADA Code wasn’t transponded in the National law and therefore the FFR could only apply the Rules according to the 2009 WADA Code.
The AFLD however dismissed the Respondents arguments about the validity of the sample collection procedure and concludes that with strict liabilty he intentionally used the prohibited substance without a medical justification.
Considering the circumstances the AFLD decides on 22 October 2015 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent M52, instead of the previous 4 years, starting on the date of the provisional suspension.

On 10 March 2015 la Fédération Française de Basket-Ball (FFBB) - the French Basketball Federation – decided to acquit the Respondent M51 for for whereabouts filing failures after three warnings.
The Respondent missed a test in April 2014 and failed to submit his whereabouts for the 3rd and 4th quarter of 2014.

Hereafter in April 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M51.

The Respondent argued that the first whereabouts failure and missed test in April 2014 should be dismissed because the Doping Control Officer was not authorized. During the proceedings the Respondent admitted his non intentional negligence with the missed test and the whereabouts.

The AFLD finds that the Doping Control Officer was duly authorized and the Respondent had previously already admitted his negligence. The AFLD concludes that the Respondent failed to give an explanation for his failures to submit his whereabouts for the 3rd and 4th quarter of 2014, nor did he contact AFLD about the missed test and his whereabouts information in 2014.
Therefore the AFLD decides on 8 October 2015 to annul the FFBB decision of 10 March 2015 and to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility starting on the date of the notification of the decision to the Respondent M51.

On 1 April 2015 la Fédération Française de Motocyclisme (FFM) – the French Motorcycling Federation – decided to discharge the Respondent M50 from prosecution after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance betamethasone. The Respondent had a TUE since 2011 for the use of the substance and he mentioned the medication on the Doping Control Form.

Hereafter in Mai 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M50.
The Respondent filed a statement sustained with medical evidence in his defence and admitted the use of the substance with a TUE. He suffered from a knee condition for several years and used the prescribed medication containing the prohibited substance.

The AFLD accepts the respondents explanation and medical evidence and concludes that the use of the medication was justified. Therefore the AFLD decides on 8 October 2015 to confirm the FFM decision of 1 April 2015 and to discharge the Respondent M50 from further prosecution.

On 27 March 2015 la Fédération Française de Volley-ball (FFVB) – the French Volleyball Federation – imposed a warning on the Respondent M49 after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance tuaminoheptane.

Hereafter in April 2015 the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) opened disciplinary proceedings against Respondent M49. The Respondent filed a statement in his defence and admitted that he had used a prescribed nasal spray as treatment for his rhinitis and sinusitis from which he suffered, without intention to enhance his performance.

Considering the Respondents negligence the AFLD decides on 8 October 2015 to impose a 3 month period on the Respondent starting on the date of the notification of the decision to the Respondent M49.