Facts
The Rugby Football Union (RFU) charges Arfon Kendrick for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. He had admitted the attempted use of growth hormone which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
On 20 September 2013, UK Anti-Doping ("UKAD") received a seizure document from the UK Border Force ("UKBF"), informing them that a package from Hong Kong labelled Jintropin (Somatropin) had been intercepted and seized. The package was addressed to Mr Kendrick.
Mr Kendrick was provisionally suspended from June 19, 2014, pending the outcome of the investigation into his case, and was requested to respond by 28 July 2014 as to whether he accepted or denied the charge. On July 23, 2014, Mr Kendrick responded to the charge by letter, stating:
“…I would like to inform you that I will not be contesting this ban as I have accepted fault on my part and cooperated fully from the outset…”
Also he indicated he would not be seeking a hearing.

The Panel has not identified any aggravating factors in this case.

Decision
The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years commencing on the date of provisional suspension, 19 June 2014. The Player has a right of an appeal as provided by RFU Regulation 20.12. No order for costs was sought or made.

Related case:
CAS 2006/A/1153 WADA vs Portuguese Football Federation & Nuno Assis Lopes de Alemeida
January 24, 2007

Mr. Nuno Assis Lopes de Almeida is a Portuguese professional footballer who played in 2006 for the club Sport Lisboa e Benfica.

In December 2005 the Federação Portuguesa de Futebol (FPF), the Portuguese Football Federation, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Nuno Assis after his A and B sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (nandrolone, norandrostenedione or norandrostenediol).
After ordering a provisional suspension, the FPF Disciplinary Committee decided on 9 June 2006 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete. The Athlete appealed this decision and on 14 July 2006 the FPF Judicial Board decided to set aside the FPF decision of 9 June 2006 on technicalities, specifically the disregard for the defence of Assis, and aquitted the Athlete after he already served a 5 month period of ineligibility.

In August 2006 WADA initiated their appeal against the decision of the FPF Judicial Board with the Court of Arbitration for Sport and requested to set aside the decision of 14 July 2006 and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
The Athlete stated that he was the victim of a conspiracy; disputed the reliability of the doping test; and claimed that there were irregularities with the transport, the testing and the analytical reports.

The CAS Panel concludes that there were no irregularities in the proceedings before the FPF Disciplinary Committee; there were no inconsistencies with the doping test result of the WADA laboratory in Portugal; it has been proven that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation; and the Athlete failed to produce evidence for his “wild and unsubstantiated allegations”.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport rules on 24 January 2007:
1.) The appeal filed on 25 August 2006 by the World Anti-Doping Agency against the decision issued on 14 July 2006 by the Judicial Board of the Portuguese Football Federation is upheld.
2.) The decision issued on 14 July 2006 by the Judicial Board of the Portuguese Football Federation is set aside.
3.) Mr Nuno Assis Lopes de Almeida is ineligible to play football for 12 months as from the notification of this award, less 161 days already served under the provisional suspensions.
4.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
5.) This award is pronounced without costs, except for the court office fee of CHF 500 (five hundred Swiss Francs) paid by the World Anti-Doping Agency, which is retained by the CAS.
6.) Mr Nuno Assis Lopes de Almeida and the Portuguese Football Federation, remaining jointly and severally liable, are ordered to pay to the World Anti-Doping Agency a contribution towards all its costs incurred in connection with the present arbitration procedure in an amount of CHF 5,000 (five thousand Swiss Francs).

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the CAS-decision of 24 January 2007 with the Swiss Federal Court.
The Athlete claimed that there was a violation of public policy and the principle of reformation in peius due to the CAS Panel imposed a heavier sanction on the Athlete.

The Swiss Federal Court rejects the Athlete’s arguments of reformation in peius and rules that the WADA appeal with CAS was valid; without violation of public policy of Swiss law; and without violation of the principle of good faith.

Therefore the Swiss Federal Court decides on 8 June 2007 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.

Facts
The Rugby Football Union (RFU) charged Christopher Jose for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rule. He had admitted the use of metandienone and testosterone which which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
On April 22, 2014, following Christopher Jose’s return to College from the Easter break, he was questioned by Bicton College’s Director of Rugby, Rob Gibson. Mr Gibson asked Christopher Jose whether he had been using performance-enhancing drugs as he had noticed that his shape had changed considerably. Upon questioning, Christopher Jose admitted to the use of performance enhancing drugs. This fact was reported to the RFU. The United Kingdom Anti-Doping made a case out of this and charged Christopher Jose in a letter for the use of prohibited substances. He responded to the letter of charge and admitted the use of metandienone and testosterone. He explained that he had been injured and was unable to play or train with his team for a lengthy period of time. He became despondent and felt somewhat abandoned. As a result he attended an alternate gym and focused all his efforts there. This led to him suffering from what he believes is a form of ‘muscle dysmorphia’ whereby he felt driven to taking performance enhancing drugs in order to improve his stature. He explains that since admitting to this violation he has not taken any further substances.
On the 15th July 2014 Graeme Simpson, UKAD Investigator, interviewed Christopher Jose in person. Mr Jose made a full admission to taking the substances. He explained that he had been injured and was unable to play or train with his team for a lengthy period of time. He became despondent and felt somewhat abandoned. As a result he attended an alternate gym and focused all his efforts there. This led to him suffering from what he believes is a form of ‘muscle dysmorphia’ whereby he felt driven to taking performance enhancing drugs in order to improve his stature. He explains that since admitting to this violation he has not taken any further substances. He is now fit and able to play rugby again. He expressed what the panel took to be genuine and significant remorse for his actions.
The only reliable evidence against this player comes solely from his own admissions. Although the admission was only made because he had been approached and asked why his appearance had changed, he could have chosen to say nothing or simply deny the violation. The panel considered a reduction of 9 months.

Decision
The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year and three months, that period commencing upon the date of his provisional suspension, namely 30th April 2014. Accordingly, he is eligible to play again from the 30th July 2015.

Facts
The UK Anti Doping charges Frankie Foster, the player, for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On July 13, 2014, the Athlete provided an sample to UKAD during a rugby match on July 13, 2014. The analysis of that sample showed the presence of clomiphene which is a prohibited substance according to the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The Athlete admitted the charge and waived his right to have the B sample analysed.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of Ineligibility of two years.
2. That period of Ineligibility starts from August 14, 2014 and will therefore end at midnight on August 13, 2016.

Facts
The UK Anti Doping charges Harry Cartwright, the player, for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On July 5, 2014, the Athlete provided an In-Competition Sample to UKAD during a rugby match subject to the jurisdiction of the Rugby Football League (RFL). The examination of that sample showed the presence of Drostanolone which is a prohibited substance according to the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The Athlete admitted the charges and asserts that his level of
fault is not significant because:
1. he was not under the jurisdiction of the ADR at the time he ingested the Prohibited Substance (March 2014);
2. he was seeking no competitive advantage; and
3. he did not think the substance would still be in his system on July 5, 2014.
The panel however concludes he failed to take full responsibility for what he ingests and uses. There are no aggraveting cirumstances or reasons for reduction of the period of ineligibility.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of Ineligibility of two years.
2. That period of Ineligibility starts from 25 July 2014 and will therefore end at midnight on 24 July 2016.

Facts
The TA (Tennis Australia) reported an anti-doping violation against Bradly Mousley. During a Match on March 30, 2014, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and its metabolite methlenedioxyamphetamine (MDA) which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Mousley admitted taking ecstasy at a party in March, he didn't had the intension to enhance his sport performance.

Decision
The Tennis Australia Anti-Doping Tribunal imposed a one year ban to commence on 30 May 2014 (when a period of provisional suspension was imposed on him by Tennis Australia pursuant to Article 17 of the Policy) and to conclude on 29 May 2015. During the suspension period Mr Mousley is ineligible to participate, as an athlete or support person in any sports that have adopted a World Anti-Doping Agency compliant anti-doping policy. Further any results and any points obtained by Mr Mousley in the ITF F4 Futures Pro Series Tournament played in Melbourne (Australia) between March 30, 2014 and April, 6 2014 are to be forfeited and Mr. Mousley is to return to the ITF any medal or prize received by him. Further all competitive results obtained by Mr, Mousley from March 30, 2014 (date the positive sample was collected) until May 30, 2014 (date of provisional suspension) are to be forfeited.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme,FFC) charges respondent M40 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on August 20, 2013, a sample was collected for doping control purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of betamethasone and heptaminol which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. They are regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent had used medication to treat a pain in his left knee, this medication contained the prohibited substances. He didn't attend a physician for which the panel regards this as a case of self medication, which is unjustifiable.

Decision
1.The decision is a period of ineligibility of 18 months in which respondent can't take part in competition and manifestation of the FFC and related French sport federations.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served in voluntary suspension and already served by the sanction of the disciplinary committee (one year period of ineligibility, cancelling results and withdrawal of medals, points and prizes) of the FFC, dated December 12, 2013.
3. The decision of the disciplinary committee of the FFC will be modified because it contradicts the current sanction.
4. The present decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

In May 2011 the International Skating Union (ISU) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kazakh Athlete Artyom Belousov after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance tuaminoheptane.

The Athlete admitted the use of Rhinofluimucil in the week before the competition, due to he suffered from complications with his paranasal sinus. He stated that he purchased the product Rhinofluimucil in a drugstore and failed the research the ingredients of the product before using, nor did he consult his team doctor.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete acted negligently without intention to enhance his sport performance.
Therefore the ISU Disciplinary Commission decides on 11 October 2011 to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 19 February 2011.

In June 2014 the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Michael Zehe (the Driver) after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances hydrochlorothiazide and testosterone. After notification the FIA ordered a provisional suspension and the Driver was heard for the FIA Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee (ADC).

The ADC concludes that an anti-doping rule violation has been established and therefore decides on 14 October 2014 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Driver, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 22 June 2014. Also the ADC decides for disqualification of the competitive results obtained by the Driver during the event, with all of the resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any trophies, points and prizes.

In May 2014 the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Marc Amez-Droz (the Driver) after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance hydrochlorothiazide. After notification the FIA ordered a provisional suspension and the Driver was heard for the FIA Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee (ADC).

The ADC concludes that an anti-doping rule violation has been established and therefore decides on 25 September 2014 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Driver, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 25 May 2014. Also the ADC decides for disqualification of the competitive results obtained by the Driver during the event, with all of the resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any trophies, points and prizes.