Facts
Christopher Jarvis (claiment) appeals against the decision of the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES). He was sentenced with a penalty of three months of ineligibility for not providing the information about his whereabouts.

History
His heavy travel agenda, coupled with his training schedule and travel to competitions, caused him to be distracted from paying close attention to his email communications, particularly as his email in-box became more heavily loaded with messages connected to his extensive community work. In the result, he was not focused on his obligations to report his whereabouts in a timely way, as required by the rules.

Decision
The claim must be dismissed. The Tribunal hereby finds and declares that the Claimant did commit an Anti-Doping Rule Violation by his failure to provide the requisite whereabouts information in three separate quarters within an 18 month period, contrary to article 10 of the Guidelines. The minimum sanction of three months’ ineligibility, as required under article 7.27 of the Doping Violations and Consequences Rules, is therefore justified. The Tribunal directs that the period of ineligibility of claiment be calculated to begin on November 20, 2007.

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 1-3 dimethylpentylamine (Methylhexaneamine). After the notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal.

Respondent admitted the violation and gave evidence that the violation was due to him taking two supplements which he bought online. He did not investigate the ingredients of the products other than referring to their labels. He believed they were energy drinks, containing Caffeine and Creatine, that would help him get over being tired from his job and give him energy to train. He was aware of athletes in other sports who took one of the products and assumed both products were safe to take. At the hearing, he gave evidence and acknowledged that the ingredient lists for both products listed Methylhexaneamine but stated he had not been aware Methylhexaneamine was prohibited.

The Tribunal accepts, by a narrow margin, that he had established he had not intended to enhance sports performance but was focused on overcoming work tiredness. The Tribunal takes into account in mitigation that: he was upfront in his declaration at the time of testing that he had been taking one of the products; that the work factor which motivated him into taking the supplements was extraneous to his swimming activities; and that he admitted the violation and accepted he was wrong to rely on informal assurances rather than making a proper enquiry.

Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 14 December 2011.

Respondent is a professional basketballer based in the USA. He had not secured a contract for any team in the 2010/2011 season and had not expected he would be able to do so. His agent then secured him a contract with the Nelson Giants in New Zealand which Respondent accepted. Respondent played his first game on April 16 2011 and was drug tested after it.
Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and Respondent was heard for the Tribunal.

Respondent admitted the violation. He gave evidence that he used cannabis with friends at the end of March when he thought there was no prospect of him competing. After the test he immediately told his coach there was a possibility he would fail the test because of his prior cannabis use in the USA. As a result of this voluntary statement, the Nelson Giants terminated his contract and he returned to the USA. The Tribunal noted that if he had not have made this voluntary statement it was likely he would have played several more games, and earned income, before the positive test result was known.
The Tribunal considered the aggravating and mitigating factors in this case. An aggravating factor was that he took a risk in playing when he knew there could be problems due to his cannabis use a few weeks earlier. Mitigating factors included:
1.) That his cannabis use in March 2011 was not in breach of the WADA Code or the Sports Anti-Doping Rules as he was not contracted at that time (although he was in breach later when testing positive in competition).
2.) His honesty in voluntarily disclosing to the Nelson Giants’ coach that he might fail the drug test and his explanation of the reason why, and his subsequent openness and co-operation with Drug Free Sport New Zealand.
3.) The significant adverse impact on him of his voluntary disclosure which led to the immediate termination of his contract with the Nelson Giants.

Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 12 week period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 16 April 2011 until 11 July 2011.

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Canrenone (metabolite of Spironolactone). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and Respondent was heard for the Tribunal.

Respondent admitted the violation and gave evidence that it was due to her use of Sprionolactone that she had been prescribed for a medical condition. She was first prescribed Spironolactone in 2005 and this prescription was repeated when she later became a patient of a different GP, who is also a sports doctor, in 2008. Respondent is a former New Zealand equestrian representative but had not competed in that sport for some time. She took up running in 2008 and in 2010 won, or achieved places, in regional and national competitions.
On the evidence, Respondent did not advise her current doctor at any stage that she was now running at a national level nor did she check with the doctor whether her prescribed medication may possibly be banned in sport. Her doctor was not aware she was competing at a national level, otherwise her doctor would have advised Respondent to apply for a therapeutic use exemption.
A Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) was granted to Respondent following an application made after the drug test, for six month effective from 28 April 2011.

The Tribunal considers that Respondent did not take Spironolactone to enhance her performance and that she was clearly not a “drugs cheat”. However, an athlete cannot avoid personal responsibility by “leaving it” to a doctor.
Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 5 May 2011.

Facts
The Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) alleges James Kelleher (the athlete) for a violation of the Canadian Anti-Doping Program (CADP). On 4 September 2006 Mr Kelleher refused, without compelling justification, to submit to sample collection after having received due and proper notification that he had been selected for doping control. On 4 October 4 2006 the SDRCC convened an administrative conference call with all parties involved in this matter. Mr. Kelleher received notice of the call but chose not to participate. On 13 October 2006, the pre-hearing conference call took place. The CCES, Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS) and the Government of Canada were all represented on that call. Mr. Kelleher did not participate.

Decision
1. The athlete has committed the anti-doping rule violation set out in CADP Rule 7.24, namely, refusing to submit to sample collection;
(2) The period of ineligibility imposed for this violation, Mr. Kelleher's first anti-doping rule violation, shall be two years, as required by CADP Rule 7.25;
(3) Mr. Kelleher shall, in addition, be permanently ineligible to receive any direct financial support provided by the Government of Canada, in accordance with CADP Rule 7.37.

Related cases:
SDT 2004_14 New Zealand Rugby League vs Vince Whare
February 17, 2005
SDT 2006_19 New Zealand Rugby League vs Vince Whare
November 28, 2006

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal.

In 2005, Respondent was warned and fined by the Tribunal for testing positive to Cannabis after a match. In 2006, Respondent appeared before the Tribunal on a similar violation involving Cannabis and the Tribunal suspended him from sport for two years. That suspension ended in 2008. On each occasion, the Tribunal warned him of the likely penalty if he offended again.

Respondent admitted the third violation. He and a witness provided evidence which satisfied the Tribunal that he smoked Cannabis socially, and not with the intention of enhancing his sports performance.
The Tribunal assessed Respondent’s degree of fault. The breach was inexcusable but the Tribunal took into account all the circumstances of the case (including his deliberate breaching of the rules despite previous warnings, his personal circumstances including the effect of suspension, and the nature of Cannabis and its social use). The Tribunal rules that a penalty greater than the minimum of 8 years’ suspension but less than the maximum lifetime
ban met the intent of the Rules.

Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 10 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 October 2010.

Facts
The Certificate attests to the presence of Stanozolol metabolites in the Athlete's sample. Stanozolol is a prohibited substance named in the 2006 WADA Prohibited List.

Decision
The Athlete's written explanation, dated and received August 17, 2006, acknowledges his use of the prohibited substance. This early admission by the Athlete is to his credit. In this circumstance, it is fair that the period of ineligibility should commence on August 17, 2006. The period of ineligibility is two years commencing August 17, 2006.

Costs:
No party made any submission regarding costs. Accordingly, each party shall bear its own costs of the hearing.

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and Respondent was heard for the Tribunal.

Respondent admitted the violation. The Tribunal accepted evidence that the Cannabis was not taken for sports performance enhancing purposes but used with a friend in a time of personal stress for Respondent. The Tribunal took into account that Respondent was under stress during the time of use as this was relevant to fault but the Tribunal took the view that this is not a major consideration. That Respondent knowingly used cannabis two days before an important match while having been educated in, and being well aware, of the anti-doping rules and Basketball New Zealand’s commitment to them, means he must accept a reasonable degree of fault.
Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 23 June 2010.

Related cases:
ST 2010_19 DFSNZ vs Adam Stewart - Decision on Jurisdiction
December 6, 2010
ST 2010_19 DFSNZ vs Adam Stewart – Decision on Application
February 16, 2011

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported anti-doping rule violations against the Respondent for attempted use and possession of prohibited substances when he imported prohibited substances by post.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and Respondent was heard for the Tribunal.

Respondent admitted the violation of attempting to use prohibited substances between 31 March 2009 and 19 May 2010 by ordering, purchasing and arranging for the delivery of the EPO, hCG and Pregnyl Solvent to a PO Box number. Respondent also admitted the possession of the prohibited substance hCG on or about 24 June 2009.
Under the Sports Anti-Doping Rules, the two incidents were to be treated as one violation with a prescribed penalty of two years’ suspension.
The Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on 7 September 2010.

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after he refused to provide a sample for drug testing. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

Respondent admitted the violation. He stated that he only participated in the competition for fun and did not intend to participate in future powerlifting competitions. He also stated he intended to compete in bodybuilding and believed that any period of suspension imposed by the Tribunal would not prevent him from doing so. The Tribunal warned him that any period of suspension it imposed here would also apply to any sporting body that is a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code.

Because of a period of delay the Tribunal finds this the consequence of consideration of some other issues that could not be attributed to Respondent. Therefore the Tribunal considered that the sanction should be reduced by 3 months to take into account the period of delay. The Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 21 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 22 June 2010 until 22 March 2012.