Facts
The French Gymnastics Federation (Fédération Française de Gymnastique, FFG) charges respondent M39 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 26, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The 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
Respondent had consumed unknowingly cake with cannabis inside two days before the doping control. He didn't had the intention to enhance his sport performance.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, from wich one month conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFG.
2. The decision start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be publisched and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Archery Federation (Fédération Française de Tir à l' Arc, FFTA) charges respondent M38 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on September 4, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on bisoprolol and hydrochlorothiazide which are prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Respondent had used medication to treat arterial hypertension (high blood pressure) which contained the prohibited substances. From his medical file the council concludes that the use of these substances are medical 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 The decision will not be published.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 Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M37 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on December 3, 2005, a sample was taken for doping tests purposes. The 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 had used cannabis the evening before the match in a social setting. There was no intention to enhance sport performance.

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

Facts
The French Handball Federation (Fédération Française de Handball, FFHB) charges respondent M36 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 19, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cocaine which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent did not comment nor produced any new document in the open procedure before the Council. Given the seriousness of the facts, it is appropriate to extend the sanction imposed by the decision of the disciplinary committee of the FFHB, dated February 7, 2006.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFHB, as pronounced by the disciplinary committee of the FFHB but extended to all French sport federations.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Landgericht München I
Urteil Az. 37 O 28331/12 Claudia Pechstein vs DESG & ISU

On 1 July 2009 the International Skating Union (ISU) imposed a 2 year period of ineligibility on the German Athlete Claudia Pechstein. On basis of all evidence presented in this case the ISU Disciplinary Commission ruled that the Athlete has applied the prohibited method of blood doping.

The Athlete denied the doping allegations and appealed with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. All 4 appeals were dismissed and the ban was upheld.

Hereafter the Athlete started proceedings with the German District Court in Munich (Landgericht München I) against the ISU and the Deutsche Eisschnelllauf-Gemeinschaft (DESG). The Athlete claimed damages suffered as a result of a doping ban.

On 26 February 2014 the Munich District Court dismissed the Athlete’s claim but also ruled that the arbitration clause contained in the athletes’ agreement between Pechstein and both the ISU and DESG to be invalid.

The Munich court found that at the time the Athletes‘ agreements with ISU and DESG were entered into, a structural disbalance (strukturelles Ungleichgewicht) existed between Pechstein and the sport federations, who formed a monopoly. Pechstein did not enter into the agreement voluntarily, but only because she had no choice. Had she not signed the agreements, she would not have been able to enter competitions and hence, unable to pursue her career as a professional athlete.

On that basis, the court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the damages claims, and the defendants could not invoke the arbitration clauses. However, the court held that it could not revisit and review the legality of the ban. As it was bound by the CAS findings that the ban was legal, the Athlete’s damages claims were unfounded.

On the issue of the legality of the ban, the arbitral award of the CAS was final, and its finality was to be respected by the Munich court. Pechstein could have, and should have challenged the jurisdiction of the CAS during the arbitral proceedings.

At the time she appealed the ban to the CAS, the structural disbalance did no longer play a role. Still, Pechstein, in full knowlegde of all the circumstances, did appeal to the CAS. At that point in time, she should have invoked that she did not enter into the arbitration agreement voluntarily.

The same was true for other procedural challenges to the CAS proceedings. The fact that the arbitration agreement is void (Nichtigkeit der Schiedsvereinbarung) does not preclude the recognition of the arbitral award in the Munich proceedings.

In March 2009 the International Skating Union (ISU) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the German Athlete Claudia Pechstein after her blood samples - provided at the 2009 ISU World Allround Speed Skating Championships in Hamar - showed abnormal reticulocytes values.

After notification in March 2009 the Athlete filed statements with evidence in her defence and was heard for the ISU Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete disputed the test result of the blood samples on several grounds.

The ISU Disciplinary Commission assessed the Athlete’s complaints and concludes that there had been no deviations from the ISU Procedures for Blood Testing. Neither does the Panel see any other circumstances which would give rise to any reasonable suspicion that the blood tests of the Athlete produced incorrect results.

Further the Athlete argued that her abnormal high blood profile was caused by a congenital blood disease, which she has to prove by undergoing medical examination. However the Athlete failed to undergo this medical examination to establish whether she has a blood disease. In addition she declined the opportunity, offered by the Panel, to produce this evidence within a reasonable time.

On basis of all evidence presented in this case the Panel is convinced of a prepondering probability that the Athlete has applied the prohibited method of blood doping.

Therefore the ISU Disciplinary Commission decides on 1 July 2009:

1.) Claudia Pechstein is declared responsible for an Anti-Doping violation under Article 2.2 of the ISU ADR by using the prohibited method of blood doping.

2.) The results obtained by Claudia Pechstein in the 500 m and 3'000 m races at the World Allround Speed Skating Championships on 7 February 2009, are disqualified and her points, prices and medals forfeited.

3.) A 2 year period of ineligibility, beginning on 9 February 2009, is imposed on Claudia Pechstein.

4.) The Deutsche Eisschnelllauf-Gemeinschaft e.V. shall pay to the ISU the costs to be determined.

5.) Each Party bears its own costs of proceedings an expenses.

Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (Fédération Française de Volley-ball, FFVB) charges respondent M35 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 16, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. 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 admitted at the panel the use of cannabis.

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

Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (French Volleyball Federation, FFVB) charges respondent M34 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 23, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. 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 mentioned the use of medication against asthma. He has a medical prescription and a medical report towards his bronchi which proof his medical state.

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

Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (French Volleyball Federation, FFVB) charges respondent M33 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 23, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of terbutaline which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had mentioned the use of medication against exercise induced asthma. He has a medical prescription and a medical report towards his bronchi which proof his medical state.

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 Federation for Public Physical Education (Union Française des Oeuvres Laïques d'Éducation Physique, UFOLEP) charges respondent M32 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on July 10, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of dexamethasone which is a prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used without medical advice, ointment and tablets containing the prohibited substance, in order to treat an inflammation. Glucocorticosteroids are not the proper medication to treat a skin disorder. Respondent didn't use the substance to enhance sport performance.

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