Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M10 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 June and 16 July 2004, respondent provided a samples for doping test purposes. Analysis of the samples showed the presence of triamcinolone acetonide and salbutamol which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent claims using medication to treat asthma and problems with his bronchi, but he has no documentated proof of this. However considering the state of his record and the forwardness of the International Union of Cycling (UCI) towards his medical condition his treatment is regarded as justifiable.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted
2. The decision will not be published.
3. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M09 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on July 18, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of triamcinolone acetonide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had mentioned on the doping control form the use of medication containing the prohibited substance. Also he has medical examinations which show the need of treatment with the prohibited substance.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted
2. The decision will not be published.
3. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M08 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on July 15, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of triamcinolone acetonide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used an ointment containing the prohibited substance, in the prescription was no name of a physician or the dosage he should use. However the medical files show that he has a medical condition, dermatitis, which needs legitimate treatment.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted
2. The decision will not be published.
3. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.

Related cases:
- ISI 2014_3 ISI Anti-Doping Committee vs Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson
May 30, 2014
- ISI 2015_8 ISI Anti-Doping Committee vs Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson
October 1, 2015
- ISI 2015_4 Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson vs ISI Anti-Doping Committee - Appeal
October 11, 2015

On 30 May 2014 the ÍSÍ Tribunal decided to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldssonn after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance levmethamfetamine.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the ÍSÍ decision with the ÍSÍ Appeal Court.

The ÍSÍ Appeal Court decides on 18 june 2014 to reduce the 3 month sanction, to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete and to uphold the disqualification of the Athlete’s results in the competition of 6 March 2014.

Related cases:
- ISI 2014_1 Thorvaldur Arni Þorvaldsson vs ISI Anti-Doping Committee - Appeal
June 18, 2014
- ISI 2015_8 ISI Anti-Doping Committee vs Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson
October 1, 2015
- ISI 2015_4 Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson vs ISI Anti-Doping Committee - Appeal
October 11, 2015

In March 2014 Lyfjaráð ÍSÍ, the Iceland ISI Anti-Doping Committee, has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Thorvaldur Arni Thorvaldsson after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance levmethamfetamine.
After notification the Athlete filed a statement with arguments in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal of the National Olympic and Sport Association of Iceland (ÍSÍ).

The Athlete argued that ÍSÍ was not authorized in this case due to the sport competition and its organisation is not a member of the National Equestrian Federation, or any other national sport federation. Therefore they are not connected to ÍSÍ and also not authorised for sample collection with the riders at that championship.
Based on the ÍSÍ Rules the ÍSÍ showed that it has jurisdiction on the sport organisations. The Athlete was a registered member and the competition was an event under the Rules of the National Equestrian Federation and therefore the Athlete was subject to provide a sample for doping control.

The Athlete stated that he had used a pill for stamina in night life 7 days before the competition which was sustained by the low concentrations found in his sample.

The Tribunal considers that the Athlete has a drug problem without intention to enhance his sport performance. Therefore the ÍSÍ Tribunal decides on 30 May 2014 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibilility on the Athlete and disqualification of his results in the competition of 6 March 2014.

Facts
The French Boxing Federation (Fédération Française de Boxe, FFBoxe) - charges respondent M07 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on June 11, 2004, respondent was summoned for a doping control but he didn't show up.

History
Respondent didn't provide any information about the reason for not attending the doping control.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 18 months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFBoxe.
2. The sanction imposed by this decision takes effect after January 24, 2005.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of American Football (Fédération Française de Football Américain, FFFA) charges respondent M06 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on August 23, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping control. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent didn't provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered his body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFFA.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of American Football (Fédération Française de Football Américain, FFFA) charges respondent M05 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on August 23, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping control. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent didn't provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered his body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFFA.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M04 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on May 14, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of salbutamol which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used medication containing the prohibited substance to treat asthma, she uses this medication over 15 years. There is proof of her condition by test results. The panel concludes that the medication is justifiable.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted
2. The decision wil not be published.
3. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.

TAS 2010/A/2201 Andrea Mangiante c/ CONI
CAS 2010/A/2201 Andrea Mangiante vs CONI

In December 2009 the Ufficio di Procura Antidoping del CONI(UPA), the Italian Anti-Doping Prosecutor's Office, has reported an anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete Andrea Mangiante after his samples - provided on 18 July 2008, 8 August 2008 and 25 March 2009 - showed a T/E ratio above the WADA threshold with GC-IRMS tested negative hereafter.
Other samples provided by the Athlete before, in between and after abovementioned data, in the period 2008 and 2009, showed normal t/e ratio results.

After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence, sustained by his experts, and was heard for the Italian National Anti-Doping Tribunal. The Athlete denied the use of prohibited substances and disputed the reliability of the samples.
Considering the arguments from the parties experts about the Athlete’s test results, the CONI TNA Panel decided on 10 July 2010 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Hereafter in August 2010 the Athlete appealed the CONI TNA decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

The CAS Panel finds that the performed tests on the Athlete’s samples in 2008 and 2009 are valid and concludes that the Athlete failed to establish that there has been a violation of the IST.
In spite of the Athlete’s arguments, the Panel considers that the tests, conducted in compliance with international standards, showed that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation due to the presence of testosterone in his urine revealed exogenous administration of a prohibited substance.

Therefore the Court for Arbitration Panel decides on 14 March 2011:
1.) The appeal filed by Andrea Mangiante 28 July 2010 against the decision of the CONI National Anti-Doping Tribunal is dismissed.
2.) The decision of 5 July 2010 by the CONI National Anti-Doping Tribunal is confirmed.
3.) Andrea Mangiante is suspended for a period of two years, starting on 5 July 2010.