IOC 2002 IOC vs Johann Muehlegg

24 Feb 2002

Related cases:

  • CAS 2002_A_374 Johann Muehlegg vs IOC
    January 24, 2003
  • CAS 2002_A_400 Johann Muehlegg vs FIS
    January 24, 2003

Mr. Johann Muehlegg is a Spanish Athlete competing in the men’s cross-country skiing at at the Salt Lake City 2002 Olympic Winter Games.

On 23 February 2002 the International Olympic Committee (IOC) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Darbepoetin (dEPO).

After notification the Athlete was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Spanish delegation argued that the substance Darbepoetin is not expressly mentioned on the list of the prohibited substances and it disputed the validation of the test method.

The IOC concludes that the Athlete has committed a doping violation and decides on 24 February 2002 that the Athlete Johann Muehlegg is:

1.) disqualified from the men’s 50 km classical cross country skiing event; and

2.) excluded from the XIX Olympic Winter Games Salt Lake City 2002, according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.

3.) The International Ski Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.

4.) The National Olympic Committee of Spain is hereby ordered to return to the IOC, not later than 17:00 hours today, the medal and the diploma awarded to the athlete in relation to the above-mentioned event.

5.) The decision shall enter into force immediately.

AFLD 2008 FFN vs Respondent M34

15 May 2008

Facts
The French Swimming Federation (Fédération Française de Natation, FFN) charges respondent M34 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a water polo match on November 3, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cocaine. Cocaine is prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent denies the use of cocaine, probably it derives from his intimate relations with his partner, which is a regular consumer of this narcotic. He even arranged a hair test on his expense which indicates an extreme low concentration of the prohibited substance. However cocaine is not regarded as a specified substance, for this reason there are no mitigating circumstances for the use of it. Also the panel regards a hair test not valid because this indicates the use over a long period of time and not the recent usage, like an urine test.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFN.
2. The decision (one year period of ineligibility), dated February 29, 2008, by the disciplinary committee of the FFN should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the decision of February 29, 2008.
4. The decision start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

IOC 2002 IOC vs Olga Danilova

24 Feb 2002

Related cases:
IOC 2002 IOC vs Larissa Lazutina
February 24, 2002
CAS 2002_A_370 Larissa Lazutina vs IOC
November 29, 2002
Swiss Federal Court 4P.267_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.268_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.269_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.270_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
May 27, 2003

Ms. Larissa Lazutina and Olga Danilova are Russian Athletes competing in de women’s cross country skiing at the Salt Lake City 2002 Olympic Winter Games.

On 21 February 2002 the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athletes after their blood and urine samples tested positive for the prohibited substance darbepoetin (dEPO), related substance to erythropoietin (EPO).
After notification the Athletes were heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission.

At the combined hearing for the two Athlete’s, the Russian delegation argued that the substance darbepoetin is not expressly mentioned on the list of the prohibited substances and disputed the validation of the test method.

The IOC Disciplinary Commission concludes that the athletes Larissa Lazutina and Olga Danilova have committed a doping offense according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.

The IOC Executive Board decides, as recommended by the IOC Disciplinary Commission, that the Athlete Olga Danilova is:
1.) disqualified from the women’s 30 km classical cross country skiing event;
2.) excluded from the XIX Olympic Winter Games Salt Lake City 2002, according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.
3.) The International Ski Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.
4.) The National Olympic Committee of the Russian Federation is hereby ordered to return to the IOC, not later than 17:00 hours today, the diploma awarded to the athlete in relation to the above-mentioned event.
5.) The decision shall enter into force immediately.

The IOC Executive Board decides, as recommended by the IOC Disciplinary Commission, that the Athlete Larissa Lazutina is:
1.) disqualified from the women’s 30 km classical cross country skiing event;
2.) excluded from the XIX Olympic Winter Games Salt Lake City 2002, according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.
3.) The International Ski Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.
4.) The National Olympic Committee of the Russian Federation is hereby ordered to return to the IOC, not later than 17:00 hours today, the medal and diploma awarded to the athlete in relation to the above-mentioned event.
5.) The decision shall enter into force immediately.

IOC 2002 IOC vs Larissa Lazutina

24 Feb 2002

Related cases:
IOC 2002 IOC vs Olga Danilova
February 24, 2002
CAS 2002_A_370 Larissa Lazutina vs IOC
November 29, 2002
Swiss Federal Court 4P.267_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.268_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.269_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
Swiss Federal Court 4P.270_2002 Larissa Lazutina & Olga Danilova vs IOC and FIS
May 27, 2002

Ms. Larissa Lazutina and Olga Danilova are Russian Athletes competing in de women’s cross country skiing at the Salt Lake City 2002 Olympic Winter Games.

On 21 February 2002 the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athletes after their blood and urine samples tested positive for the prohibited substance darbepoetin (dEPO), related substance to erythropoietin (EPO).
After notification the Athletes were heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission.

At the combined hearing for the two Athlete’s, the Russian delegation argued that the substance darbepoetin is not expressly mentioned on the list of the prohibited substances and disputed the validation of the test method.

The IOC Disciplinary Commission concludes that the athletes Larissa Lazutina and Olga Danilova have committed a doping offense according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.

The IOC Executive Board decides, as recommended by the IOC Disciplinary Commission, that the Athlete Larissa Lazutina is:
1.) disqualified from the women’s 30 km classical cross country skiing event;
2.) excluded from the XIX Olympic Winter Games Salt Lake City 2002, according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.
3.) The International Ski Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.
4.) The National Olympic Committee of the Russian Federation is hereby ordered to return to the IOC, not later than 17:00 hours today, the medal and diploma awarded to the athlete in relation to the above-mentioned event.
5.) The decision shall enter into force immediately.

The IOC Executive Board decides, as recommended by the IOC Disciplinary Commission, that the Athlete Olga Danilova is:
1.) disqualified from the women’s 30 km classical cross country skiing event;
2.) excluded from the XIX Olympic Winter Games Salt Lake City 2002, according to Chapter II, Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.
3.) The International Ski Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.
4.) The National Olympic Committee of the Russian Federation is hereby ordered to return to the IOC, not later than 17:00 hours today, the diploma awarded to the athlete in relation to the above-mentioned event.
5.) The decision shall enter into force immediately.

AFLD 2008 FFC vs Respondent M33

17 Apr 2008

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M33 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on July 20, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the blood samples showed a high testosterone on epitestosterone level. A complementary spectrometric analysis of the sample revealed an exogenous origin of testosterone. Exogenous testosterone 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 nor did he mention the use of a prohibtited substance on the doping control form.

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

AFLD 2008 FFBB vs Respondent M32

17 Apr 2008

Facts
The French Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M32 or a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on September 28, 2007, 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 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used the cannabis on the day of the match. He is a regular user and he describes it as enhancing his mood.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFBB.
2. The decision (one month period of ineligibility) January 11, 2007, of the disciplinary committee of the FFBB should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period served by the decision of January 11, 2007.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2008 FFV vs Respondent M31

17 Apr 2008

Facts
The French Sailing Federation (Fédération Française de Voile, FFV) charges respondent M31 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a sailing event on September 4, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. 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 and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used the cannabis in a recreational setting, he isn't a regular user. The reason for using it was to relax his family problems and bad results in sport. The panel takes into consideration that the measured concentration was very low, the absence of desire for using cannabis and it was his first offense.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized or authorized by the FFV.
2. The decision (six months period of ineligibility), dated November 21, 2007, of the disciplinary committee of the FFV should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility should be reduced by the time already served by the decision of November 21, 2007.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2008 FFBB vs Respondent M30

17 Apr 2008

Facts
The French Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M30 or a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on October 27, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of heptaminol. Heptaminol is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substances.

History
The respondent uses medication to treat the risk of edema in her legs. This medication contains the prohibited substance. She has statements from his general practitioner to prove this condition. She hadn't checked the ingredients of the medication she had acquired by herself.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one month, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFBB.
2. The decision (acquittal) dated January 11, 2007, of the disciplinary committee of the FFBB should be modified.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2008 FFJDA vs Respondent M29

17 Apr 2008

Related case:
AFLD 2015 FFJDA vs Respondent M42
September 10, 2015

Facts
The French Federation for Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo et Disciplines Associées FFJDA) charges respondent M29 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a judo tournament on April 21, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of prednisone and prednisolone which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. Prednisone and prednisolone are regarded as specified substance.

History
The respondent suffers from an anatomical abnormality. Five days before the doping control he took injections with the prohibited substances to treat back pain. He had mentioned the use of the pharmaceutical product on the doping control form. He had no intention to enhance his sport performance. He took a risk with the treatment to be sure to participate in the tournament.

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

AFLD 2008 FFCC vs Respondent M28

5 Jun 2008

Facts
The French Federation of Bullfighting (Federation Française de course camarguaise, FFCC) charges respondent M28 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an event on October 7, 2007, the respondent didn't attend the doping control.

History
The respondent claims that he wasn't informed to be tested. He left the event without seeing the sampler. But later he admits that he was afraid being tested positive for the use of cannabis.
Respondent had made an appeal against the decision of the disciplinary committee.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFCC.
2. The decision (period of ineligibility of one year, six months conditional) made by the disciplinary committee of the FFCC, dated November 15, 2007, should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility should reduced with the time already served by the decision of November 15, 2007.
4. The present decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Category
  • Legal Source
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period
Origin