Decisions

Anti-doping - cannabis - NZ representative player - recreational use at party 5 weeks before test - defendant not under contract at time of use - defendant served interim suspension of 2 matches - defendant exposed to adverse publicity and suffered financial consequences as result of interim suspension... - no aggravating circumstances justifying further suspension - warning and reprimand imposed.

Anti-doping case · Basketball · 14 August 2006

Anti-doping - Terbutaline - cyclist not aware needed to get Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for asthma inhaler - While surprising defendant did not have a better knowledge of what was required, Tribunal accepted that in the circumstances she did not - defendant selected at short notice to represent NZ... for first time, not a carded athlete, had not been on any drug testing programme, and had never been drug tested before - observations about obligations on National Sports Organisations to inform athletes about TUEs and anti-doping matters - Tribunal accepted defendant did not use terbutaline with intention of enhancing sports performance and that her failure to obtain TUE was due to inadvertence - minimum penalty of a warning and reprimand was appropriate.

Anti-doping case · Cycling · 31 May 2005

Appeal against decision of a national sports organisation - athlete appealed against not being nominated in December 2005 by Table Tennis NZ (TTNZ) for one of five Prime Minister’s Athlete Scholarships allocated to TTNZ - after considerable correspondence with TTNZ, athlete appealed to Tribunal in... May 2006 - jurisdiction to hear appeal - whether Tribunal can hear appeal on any matter - Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear appeal on this matter if brought in time - however, appeal out of time - TTNZ constitution requires appeal to be made within 28 days of TTNZ decision and time limit expired in January 2006 - Tribunal could not extend time limit and therefore had no jurisdiction to hear matter - appeal dismissed.

Non anti-doping case · Table Tennis · 4 August 2006

Anti-doping – cannabis – recreational use – defendant tested positive for cannabis after winning NZ boxing title – he used cannabis at party two weeks before tournament – Tribunal accepted defendant’s claim that he was unaware that cannabis was prohibited substance under WADA Code – defendant... not a member of Boxing NZ’s elite or development squad and may not have received same level of information as those in squads - however, this did not excuse cannabis offending. Tribunal reviewed principles for imposing penalties in cannabis cases - Tribunal referred to sanctions imposed in UK, Canada and Australia for cannabis violations – Tribunal considered warning and reprimand was appropriate penalty when the cannabis use was unrelated to the sport, was not taken for performance enhancing purposes, did not represent a danger to others and there were no other aggravating factors – warning and reprimand imposed.

Anti-doping case · Boxing · 7 March 2005