AFLD 2013 FFSA vs Respondent M15

14 Feb 2013

Facts
The French Motor Sports Federation (Fédération Française du Sport Automobile, FFSA) charges respondent M15 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an "course de côte de sport automobile", on September 9, 2012, a sample for doping control purposes was taken from the respondent. His sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent claimed to have used the cannabis at a festivity two days before the testing.

Decision
1. The sanction will be a period of ineligibility of 9 months, in which respondent can't play competition or take part in manifestations in his sport.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision taken on November 6 , 2012 by the disciplinary committee of the French Motor Sports Federation should be modified.
4. The present decision shall take effect from the date of notification
the respondent.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2013 FFSA vs Respondent M14

14 Feb 2013

Facts
The French Motor Sport Federation (Fédération Française du Sport Automobile, FFSA) charges Respondent M14 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During the manche du championnat de France « Grand Tourisme », on July 15, 2012, the respondent provided a sample for a doping test. His sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent uses cannabis to ease the pain for his spondylitis ankyiosante.

Decision
1. The appropriate sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months, in which respondent can't take part in competions or manifestations organized by his sport.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision of the October 5, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the French Motor Sports Federation is adapted (which was a 4 months period of ineligibility).
4. The present decision shall take effect from the date of notification to the respondent.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2013 FFC vs Respondent M11

31 Jan 2013

Facts
The Fédération Française de Cyclisme (FFC) charges respondent M11 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During the test time trial "championnat de France, categorie veterans, de cyclisme", on May 26, 2012, a sample for doping purpose was taken from the respondent. His sample tested positive on the presence of triamcinolone acetonide, N-ethylnicotinamide a metabolite of nikethamide, trenbolone and its metabolite a-trenbolone, a report of a spectrometric analysis indicating an external origin of metabolites from testosterone.

History
The respondent claims that the prohibited substances came from medication he used for bronchites and supplements he took.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 4 years, in which he will be excluded for competition and sport related manifestations.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with his time of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision will be taken into effect on the date of the notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AAA 2013 No. 77 190 00462 13 JENF USADA vs Alexandra Klineman

12 Dec 2013

Respondent Alexandra Klineman is 23 year old volleyball player and member of USA Volleyball.

The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Respondent after her three out-of-competition samples (provided on 22 May, 19 June and 26 June 2013) tested positive for the prohibited substance dehydroepiandrosteron (DHEA).
USADA notified Respondent of the doping violation and ordered a provisional suspension. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the North American Court of Arbitration for Sport Panel on 13 November 2013.

Respondent stated that her positive results were from the inadvertent ingestion of her mother’s DHEA supplement and she had no intention to enhance her sport performance.
The Panel concludes that the Respondent is an innocent athlete who tested positive by accident and did everything humanly possible to provide USADA with all the information required regarding her positive test.

The North American Court of Arbitration for Sport (NACAS) l therefore decides:
1.) Respondent has committed her first doping violation under the 2009 version of the WADA Code.
2.) Respondent has sustained her burden of proof under the WADA Code. Therefore the Panel imposes a period of ineligibility starting from the date of the sample collection of her first positive test on 22 May 2013 and continuing through 9 June 2014, a period spanning thirteen months.
3.) The parties shall bear their own attorney's fees and costs associated with this arbitration.
4.) The administrative fees and expenses of the American Arbitration Association, and the compensation and expenses of the arbitrators and the Panel, shall be borne entirely by USADA and the United States Olympic Committee.

AFLD 2013 FSGT vs Respondent M10

31 Jan 2013

Facts
The Fédération Sportive et Gymnastique du Travail (FSGT) charges the respondent M10 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During the "championnat federal omniforces d'halterophilie" on May 26, 2012 a sample for doping test was provided by the respondent. His sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis with an amount above the threshold value. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

Decision
1. The respondent is sanctioned with a period of ineligibility of 6 months, in which he can't take part in competition and manifestations of the "Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme" and the "Fédération Sportive et Gymnique du Travail".
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision of the Fédération Sportive et Gymnique du Travail, dated August 28, 2012, will be modified to the current decision.
4. The decision will be taken in effect on the day of the notifcation of the respondent.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

TASS 8/S/2012 WADA vs Polish Athletic Federation & Anna Wloka

13 May 2013

In April 2012 the Polish Athletic Federation has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Anna Wloka after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine.
The Athlete stated she had used a dietary supplement provided by her trainer.

Considering the circumstances the Commission for Distinctions, Discipline and against Doping of the Polish Athletic Federation decided to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of sample collection, i.e. on 28 January 2012.
On 19 June 2012 the Commission for Distinctions, Discipline and against Doping of the Polish Athletic Federation reviewed the case and decided to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on 28 January 2012 to 28 July 2012.

Hereafter WADA appealed the decision of the Polish Athletic Federation with the Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee (Trybunał Arbitrażowy do Spraw Sportu przy Polskim Komitecie Olimpijskim).
WADA argued that a longer period of ineligibility should be imposed on the Athlete but also submitted that the period of ineligibility could be reduced from 2 years to 12 months because of the circumstances.

The Tribunal concludes that the Athlete had no intention to enhance her performance and she trusted her trainer who supplied the supplement with the prohibited substance. For the administration of the supplement a 4 year period of ineligibility was imposed on the Athlete’s trainer.
The Tribunal finds that the WADA appeal should be granted in part and changes the decision of the Polish Athletic Federation. Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee decides to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

TASS 7/S/2012 WADA vs Polish Rugby Union & Krzystof Hotowski

26 Jun 2013

In August 2011 the Polish Rugby Union has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Krzystof Hotowski after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance oxilofrine.
The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and admitted he had used supplements and fatburners to lose weight.
He stated he didn’t know the supplements contained prohibited substances and paid less research of the ingredients of the supplements until he was notified of the positive test.
On 5 October 2011 the Games and Discipline Commission of the Polish Rugby Union decided to impose a reprimand on the Athlete.

In July 2012, due to the late delivery of the complete case file, WADA appealed the decision of the Polish Ice Hockey Federation with the Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee (Trybunał Arbitrażowy do Spraw Sportu przy Polskim Komitecie Olimpijskim).
WADA argued that the Athlete should be sanctioned with ineligibility for a period of 2 years and that there are no grounds for waiving or shortening the sanction.

The Tribunal rules that WADA’s appeal is granted in part due to the fact that the violation occurred before 1 September 2011, i.e. before the Model Anti-Doping rules came into effect in Poland.
Here the principle of lex mitior appropriately applies under the circumstances of the case. The Polish Rugby Union Disciplinary Rules, in force before 1 September 2011, were more lenient for the Athlete.
Considering the circumstances the Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee decides to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

AFLD 2013 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M09 - Revision

31 Jan 2013

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges Respondent M09 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. On May 27, 2012, during the France Senior Championship bodybuilding at Creon (Gironde) the respondent provided a sample for a doping test. His sample tested positive on methylhexamine, 19 - norandrosterone with a concentration estimated at 3.3 nanograms per milliliter, boldenone and its metabolite, trenbolone and his metabolites and that a report on testosterone epitestosterone abnormally high. The analysis by complementary mass spectrometry isotope ratio indicating
an exogenous source of metabolites of testosterone.

History
The respondent purchased the products from the internet and also and learned by the internet how to use them with the help from persons present in the same training room. He didn't check the ingredients for prohibited substances.

Desicion
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 4 years, excluded from competition and sports related events.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period of ineligibility.
3. The earlier decision by the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC, dated August 7, 2012, will be modified.
4. The date of notification will be the starting date of the period of ineligibility.
5. The decision will be published en sent to the parties involved.

TASS 6/S/2012 WADA vs Polish Rugby Union & Tomasz Świadek

26 Jun 2013

In August 2011 the Polish Rugby Union has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Tomasz Świadek after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances oxilofrine and methylhexaneamine.

The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and admitted he had used a supplement as fat burner before the competition season. Before using he researched the ingredients of the supplement and found no prohibited substances on the label. However after the notification the Athlete found out that methylhexaneamine was mentioned on the label under the name of geranium oil extract.
The substance oxilofrine was not mentioned at all on the label of the supplement.
On 28 October 2011 the Games and Discipline Commission of the Polish Rugby Union decided to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete until 30 March 2012.

In July 2012, due to the late delivery of the complete case file, WADA appealed the decision of the Polish Rugby Union with the Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee (Trybunał Arbitrażowy do Spraw Sportu przy Polskim Komitecie Olimpijskim).
WADA argued that the Athlete should be sanctioned with ineligibility for a period of 2 years and that there are no grounds for waiving or shortening the sanction.

The Tribunal rules that WADA’s appeal should be dismissed due to the fact that the violation occurred before 1 September 2011, i.e. before the Model Anti-Doping rules came into effect in Poland.
Here the principle of lex mitior appropriately applies under the circumstances of the case. The Polish Rugby Union Disciplinary Rules, in force before 1 September 2011, were more lenient for the Athlete, therefore the Tribunal found no grounds for modification of the imposed sanction.
The Court of Arbitration for Sports at the Polish Olympic Committee decides to dismiss WADA’s appeal and charges the appellant to bear the costs of the proceedings.

AFLD 2013 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M08 - Revision

31 Jan 2013

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges Respondent M08 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. On May 27, 2012, during the France Senior Championship bodybuilding at Creon (Gironde) the respondent provided a sample for a doping test. His sample tested positive on canrenone and three metabolites of stanozolol which are prohibited substances on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent claims that purchased supplements from the internet are the cause of the positive test, he hadn't mentioned these supplements on the doping form and used them without checking the ingredients.

Decision
1. The sanctioned period of ineligibility will be 4 years, for competition and sportmanifestation organized by the French sport federations.
2. The 4 years will be reduced with the period of provisional suspension.
3. The earlier decision of the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC will be changed.
4. The present decision shall take effect from the date of notification of the respondent.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the involved parties.

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