Related cases:
CAS 2007/A/1396 WADA & UCI vs Alejandro Valverde & RFEC
May 31, 2010
CAS 2007/O/1381 RFEC & Alejandro Valverde vs UCI
September 26, 2007
CAS 2009/A/1879 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
March 16, 2010
Swiss Federal Court 4A_234_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
October 29, 2010
Swiss Federal Court 4A_420_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs WADA, UCI & RFEC
January 3, 2011
Swiss Federal Court 4A_644_2009 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
April 13, 2010

On 31 May 2010 the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility (CAS 2007/A/1396 & 1402) on the Athlete Alejandro Valverde for committing an anti-doping rule violation. In this case the CAS Panel dismissed the request made by WADA and UCI to annul the Athlete’s results prior to 1 January 2010.

On 29 June 2010 the Athlete appeal the CAS decision of 31 May 2010 with the Swiss Federal Court.
The Athlete filed several objections regarding the challenged arbitrator Fernandez Ballesteros, the jurisdiction of CAS, his right to be heard, the disqualification of his results and the principle of ne bis in idem in this case.
The Swiss Federal Court concludes that the Athlete’s objections haven no ground and therefore decides on 3 January 2011 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M81 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on March 6, 2012, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on the prohibited substance 19-norandostrone. 19-norandostrone is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency prohibited list.

History
The respondent admitted that he injected the norandostrone intramuscularly, in order to improve his physical condition. Because of personal problems which lead to deterioration of his psychological state, for which he was hospitalized, made him using the prohibited substance. He has medical prescriptions to prove this.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the French sport federations.
2. The present decision shall take effect from the date of notification
sent to the respondent. It will apply until the end of the sanction dated May 15, 2012 by the disciplinary committee of the FFC.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation for Savate, French Boxing and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Savate Boxe Française et Disciplines Associées, FFSBFDA) charges respondent M80 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an event on January 14, 2012, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence nikethamide and it's metabolite. Nikethamide is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent explains that he use medications containing the prohibited substance for which he has a medical certificate, however it is not mentioned when the consultation took place and against which disease it was used.

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 FFSBFDA.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the earlier decision, dated April 10, 2012, by the disciplinary committee of the FFSBFDA.
3. The earlier decision, dated April 10, 2012, by the disciplinary committee of the FFSBFDA will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. All the results obtained at the event on January 14, 2012, will be cancelled. Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.
6. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Ice Hockey Federation (Fédération Française de Hockey sur Glace, FFHG) charges respondent M79 for a violaton of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on January 28, 2012, 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 didn't use the prohibited substance to enhance his sport performance, it was used in a recreational setting.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four months in which the respondent can't take place in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFHG.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served in voluntary suspension.
3. The decision will start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M78 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a weightlifting event on January 7, 2012, 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 denies that he used the prohibited substance to enhance his sport performance, it was used in a recreational setting.

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

Related cases:
CAS 2007/A/1396 WADA & UCI vs Alejandro Valverde & RFEC
May 31, 2010
CAS 2007/O/1381 RFEC & Alejandro Valverde vs UCI
September 26, 2007
CAS 2009/A/1879 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
March 16, 2010
Swiss Federal Court 4A_386_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs WADA, UCI & RFEC
January 3, 2011
Swiss Federal Court 4A_420_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs WADA, UCI & RFEC
January 3, 2011
Swiss Federal Court 4A_644_2009 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
April 13, 2010

On 11 May 2009 Comitato Olimpico Nazionale Italiano (CONI), the Italian National Olympic Committee, decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Alejandro Valverde for committing an anti-doping rule violation.
The Athlete appealed the CONI decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and on 16 March 2010 the Panel decided in this case (CAS 2009/A/1879) to uphold the CONI decision of 11 May 2009.
On 29 October 2009 the Athlete requested the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) to challenge the CAS arbitrator Ulrich Haas. On 23 November 2009 ICAS decided to dismiss the Athlete’s request.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the ICAS decision of 29 October 2009 op with the Swiss Federal Court.
On 13 April 2010 the Swiss Federal Court concluded it has no jurisdiction and therefore decided to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.

On 28 April 2010 the Athlete appealed again with the Swiss Federal Court. The Athlete requested the Court to dismiss the CAS decision of 16 March 2010 and to challenge the CAS arbitrator Ulrich Haas.
The Athlete argued that his rights for a fair trial were violated by CAS.
The Swiss Federal Court concludes on 29 October 2010 that there are no grounds to challenge the arbitrator Ulrich Haas and dismiss the Athlete’s arguments about the violation of his rights.

Facts
The French Federation for Savate, French Boxing and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Savate Boxe Française et Disciplines Associées, FFSBFDA) charges respondent M77 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an event on January 14, 2012, 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 explained that he is addicted to cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFSBFDA.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the earlier decision, dated April 10, 2012, by the disciplinary committee of the FFSBFDA.
3. The earlier decision, dated April 10, 2012, by the disciplinary committee of the FFSBFDA will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. All the results obtained at the event on January 14, 2012, will be canceled. Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.
6. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges M76 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a pose-down contest on February 8, 2012, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of: clenbuterol, 3 metabolites of stanozolol, a metabolite of drostanolone and a metabolite of nandrolone. All of these substances are prohibited according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent didn't give any explanation about how the prohibited substances entered his body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period ineligibility of four years in which participant can't take part in competition or manifestation 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.

Related cases:
CAS 2007/A/1396 WADA & UCI vs Alejandro Valverde & RFEC
May 31, 2010
CAS 2007/O/1381 RFEC & Alejandro Valverde vs UCI
September 26, 2007
CAS 2009/A/1879 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
March 16, 2010
Swiss Federal Court 4A_234_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
October 29, 2010
Swiss Federal Court 4A_386_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs WADA, UCI & RFEC
January 3, 2011
Swiss Federal Court 4A_420_2010 Alejandro Valverde vs WADA, UCI & RFEC
January 3, 2011
Swiss Federal Court 4A_644_2009 Alejandro Valverde vs CONI, WADA & UCI
April 13, 2010

On 11 May 2009 Comitato Olimpico Nazionale Italiano (CONI), the Italian National Olympic Committee, decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Alejandro Valverde for committing an anti-doping rule violation.
The Athlete appealed this CONI decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and on 16 March 2010 the Panel decided in this case (CAS 2009/A/1879) to uphold the CONI decision of 11 May 2009.
On 29 October 2009 the Athlete requested the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) to challenge the CAS arbitrator Ulrich Haas. On 23 November 2009 ICAS decided to dismiss the Athlete’s request.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the ICAS decision of 29 October 2009 with the Swiss Federal Court.
On 13 April 2010 the Swiss Federal Court concludes it has no jurisdiction and therefore decides to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M75 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. When the respondent was taking part in a pose-down contest on February 8, 2012, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of clenbuterol, three metabolites of stanozolol or precursor thereof, a metabolite of metandienone, metenolone and its metabolites.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 4 years in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the French sport federations.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.