The New Zealand Rugby League (NZRL) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Defendant after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.
NZRL notified the Defendant and ordered a provisional suspension. Hereafter the Defendant was heard for the Tribunal. The Defendant admitted he had committed a doping infraction for using Cannabis two week before the test.
Faced with evidence to the contrary, the Defendant did not press his initial statement any further and stated he may have used Cannabis closer to the time of the test. The Tribunal accepts that the Defendant did not use Cannabis for performance enhancing purposes. Considering all the circumstances the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Defendants starting on 28 August 2007.

Facts
The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) alleges Elson Marcelo Baldin Pagoto (the athlete) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules for Human Athletes (ADRHA). Mr. Eison Marceio Baldin Pagoto (the "Athlete") participated at the CIC3* in Colina SP, Brazil from 21 to 22 April 2012 , in the discipline of Eventing. On 22 April 2012, the Athlete was selected for in-competition testing. The analysis of the urine sample revealed the presence of Isometheptene and metabolites. Isometheptene is a Prohibited Substance according to the 2012 Prohibited List of the World Anti-Doping Agency ("WADA") and is considered a "Specified Substance". The athlete waived his right to have the B-Sample analysis performed.

History
The athlete had ingested the medication "Neosaldina", as declared on the Doping Control Form, on the day prior to sample collection to treat migraines. That he was not aware that Neosaldina contained the Prohibited Substance Isometheptene, and would not have used it had he known it contained Prohibited Substances. That Neosaldina was a commonly used medication for headaches in Brazil, and available over the counter. The athlete's sole intention had been to heal a migraine crisis, and that he had no intention to enhance his performance. He confirmed that he was not a migraine sufferer. That he had taken one (1) Neosaldina tablet from his brother - as affirmed by his brother during the Hearing - since a light headache kept him from sleeping the night before the competition. That he had felt better after taking Neosaldina and that it allowed him to sleep. That according to the package, the recommended dose was three to four tablets per day. That a friend of his, a medical doctor, had suggested Neosaldina to him for headaches, but that he had not conducted any research on the Prohibited List prior to being confronted with the Adverse Analytical Finding.

Decision
1. The Athlete shall be suspended for a period of nine ( 9 ) months to be effective immediately and without further notice from today's date. Therefore, the Athlete shall be ineligible through 22 April 2013.
2. The Athlete is fined CHF 2000.
3. No Athlete who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in a Competition or activity (other than authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs) that is authorized or organized by the FEI or any National Federation or be present at an Event (other than as a spectator) that is authorized or organized by the FEI or any National Federation, or participate in any capacity in Competitions authorized or organized by any international or national-level Event organization (Article 10.10.1 of the ADRHA). Under Article 10.10.2 of the ADRHA, specific consequences are foreseen for a violation of the period of Ineligibility.
4. According to Article 168.4 of the GR's, the present Decision is effective from the day of written notification to the persons and bodies concerned.

Appeal
In accordance with Article 12 of the ADRHA, the Athlete and the FEI may appeal against this decision by lodging an appeal with the Court of
Arbitration for Sport within 30 days of receipt hereof.

Costs
A decision on costs will be rendered separately.

The New Zealand Rugby League (NZRL) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Defendants Sonny Cavanagh and Joe Vaifale after their samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.

NZRL notified the Defendants and ordered a provisional suspension. Hereafter they were heard for the Tribunal.
Defendant Cavanagh stated he had smoked Cannabis approximately two weeks before the doping test. He suffered from a back injury and had difficulty sleeping although he used pain killers.
Defendant Vaifale stated he had smoked Cannabis a week before the doping test at a birthday celebration.
The Defendants stated they were aware of the existence of anti-doping rules, however they did not know that Cannabis was included on the list of prohibited substances.

The Tribunal accepts that the Defendants did not smoke Cannabis for performance enhancing purposes but finds their other assertions barely credible. Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 6 week period of ineligibility on the Defendants starting on the date of their provisional suspension.

Facts
The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) alleges Eder Gustavo Baldin Pagoto (the athlete) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules for Human Athletes (ADRHA). The athlete participated at the CIC2* in Colina SP, Brazil from 21 to 22 April 2012, in the discipline of Eventing. On 22 April 2012, the athlete was selected for in-competition testing. Analysis of the urine sample revealed the presence of isometheptene and metabolites. Isometheptene is a Prohibited Substance according to the 2012 Prohibited List of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Isometheptene is considered a "Specified Substance" under the 2012 WADA Prohibited List. It is prohibited in-competition. The Athlete waived his right to have the B-Sample analysis performed.

History
The athlete had ingested the medication "Neosaldina" as declared on the Doping Control Form, on the day prior to sample collection to treat a migraine crisis. That he was not aware that Neosaldina contained the Prohibited Substance Isometheptene, and that, had he known this, he would have applied for a Therapeutic Use Exemption ("TUE"). That he had been suffering from migraines for years and that Neosaldina had been prescribed by his doctor.

Considerations panel
The athlete was negligent for not telling his physician that he was an athlete undergoing doping controls. His research for prohibited substances in his medicine wasn't very thorough.

Decision
1. The Athlete shall be suspended for a period of six (6) months to be effective immediately and without further notice from today's date. Therefore, the Athlete shall be ineligible through 22 January 2013.
2. The Athlete is fined CHF 1500.
3. No Athlete who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in a Competition or activity (other than authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs) that is authorized or organized by the FEI or any National Federation or be present at an Event (other than as a spectator) that is authorized or organized by the FEI or any National Federation, or participate in any capacity in Competitions authorized or organized by any international or national-level Event organization (Article 10.10,1 of the ADRHA). Under Article 10.10.2 of the ADRHA, specific consequences are foreseen for a violation of the period of Ineligibility.

Costs
A decision on costs will be rendered separately.

Basketball New Zealand (BBNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.
After notification the Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal. Respondent admitted he had smoked Cannabis two to three weeks prior to the doping test and had no intention to enhance his sport performance.
The Tribunal accepts that Respondent did not smoke Cannabis for performance enhancing purposed. Because the Respondent has retired from competitive basketball, the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a suspension of 2 months from competing in any events and competitions conducted by or under the auspices of BBNZ.

The New Zealand Rugby League (NZRL) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.
NZRL notified the Respondent and ordered a provisional suspension. The Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal. Respondent admitted he had smoked Cannabis at a party a couple of days before the competition.
The Tribunal accepts that Respondent did not smoke Cannabis for performance enhancing purposes and finds that Respondent has already been penalized as the result of the provisional suspension.
Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of this decision.

Facts
The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) alleges Darryl Billing (the Athlete) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules for Human Athletes (ADRHA). The Athlete participated at the Bromont International CAI - A, CAN, from 24 to 27 June 2010. On 26 June 2010, the Athlete was selected for in-competition testing.
The analysis revealed the presence of Hydrochlorothiazide which is a Prohibited Substances. Hydrochlorothiazide are "Specified Substances" and are prohibited in- and out-of-competition.

History
On 13 September 2010, the Athlete submitted a formal Standard Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) Application form to the FEI, for the daily oral use of Hydrochlorothiazide, Acupril and Quinapril. Together with his TUE application, the Athlete submitted various medical documents and explained that the substances are taken because of high blood pressure. The Athlete further requested that a retroactive TUE be granted to him for the use of Hydrochlorothiazide. The TUE Committee granted the use of the substances as requested by the Athlete, for a period of two (2) years, starting on 15 September 2010.

Considerations panel
It has been established how the specified substance has entered the body of the athlete.
The panel agrees that there was no intention to enhance performances, and a retrospective TUE was granted. But it is regarded as negligence not knowing to have asked for a TUE.

Decision
1. The Athlete shall be formally reprimanded.
2. The Athlete is fined CHF 1500,00.-.
3. As a result of the foregoing/ the Tribunal has decided to disqualify the Athlete from the Event and all medals, points and prize money won at the Event must be forfeited, in accordance with FEI ADRHA Article 9.

Costs
The Athlete shall contribute CHF 1000,00.- towards the legal costs of the legal procedure.

Related cases:
SDT 2004_14 New Zealand Rugby League vs Vince Whare
February 17, 2005
ST 2010 DFSNZ vs Vince Whare
March 1, 2010

The New Zealand Rugby League (NZRL) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis. This was Respondent’s second anti-doping violation. On the first occasion, on 17 March 2005, he was reprimanded, fined and ordered to pay costs.
NZRL notified the Respondent and ordered a provisional suspension. The Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal. Respondent testified he had used Cannabis for relief during a time of difficult personal circumstances and not to enhance his sport performance.
The Tribunal concludes this was Respondent’s second violation and he did not use Cannabis for performance-enhancing purposes.
The Sports Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on the date of his provisional suspension.

The New Zealand Federation of Body Builders (NZFBB) has reported an anti-doping rule violations against Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Nandrolone on two occasions in October 2005.
After notification the Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal. Respondent stated that prior to the competitions he was provided with a sample dietary product and had no idea that the product contained a prohibited substance. He did not research the ingredients of the product before using it and expressed genuine remorse for his error of judgment.

The Tribunal accepts Respondent’s evidence that he took the substance once only and treats the two positive tests as being the first violation.
The Sports Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Respondent starting on 31 October 2005. In addition the Respondent is disqualified from the two competitions.

Related case:
CAS 2012/A/2960 WADA vs Angela Covert & FEI
January 31, 2014

Fact
The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) alleges Angela Covert (the athlete) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Angela Covert (the "Athlete") participated at the CSI4*-W, Spruce Meadows AB in Calgary, Canada from 30 June to 3 July 2011 (the "Event"), in the discipline of Jumping. On 30 June 2011, the Athlete was selected for in-competition testing. Analysis of urine sample revealed the presence of Methylhexaneamine (Dimethylphentylamine) which is a Prohibited Substance according to the 2011 Prohibited List of the World Anti-Doping Agency ("WADA") and is considered a "Specified Substance".

History
On 25 August 2011, the Athlete requested for the B-Sample
analysis to be performed in a different laboratory than the A-Sample analysis. She argues that because of the use of a nasal spray (Euvanol Spray), due to a fractured nose to stop the bleeding. The prohibited substance was not listed as a ingredient, but it contained geranium oil which has a small percentage of the prohibited substance. An expert stated that this amount is consistent with the results of the sample test. She didn't want to enhance her performance. Because Methylhexaneamine was a Specified Substance, Article 10.4 of the ADRHA had to be applied and since it was the Athlete's first violation, only a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility should be imposed on her.

Decision
1. The Athlete shall be formally reprimanded.
2. The Athlete is fined CHF 500.
3. According to Article 168.4 of the GRs, the present Decision is
effective from the day of written notification to the persons and
bodies concerned.

Appeal
In accordance with Article 12 of the ADRHA, the Athlete and the
FEI may appeal against this decision by lodging an appeal with the
Court of Arbitration for Sport within 30 days of receipt hereof.

Costs
Each Party shall bear its own legal costs of the legal procedure.