-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Karl Murray
Overview: Anti-doping – Cyclist (M) intentional use of non- specified substance during Tour of Northland – presumptive period of ineligibility four years – second anti-doping violation subject to “twice the period of ineligibility” – challenge to a previous New Caledonia ban being counted as first violation – New Caledonia non-signatory to the Code – New Caledonia…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Christopher Ware
Clenbuterol, Possession of prohibited substances/methods, Use / attempted use of prohibited substances/methodsOverview: Anti-doping – UK based club cricket player (CW) admitted violations of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 rule 3.2 and 2015 rule 2.2 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including online purchase of prohibited products by CW in 2014 and 2015 – attempted use prohibited substance – provisionally suspended without opposition – admitted violation of SADR…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Lachlan Frear
Overview: Anti-doping – ice hockey player (LF) admitted violations of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 rule 3.2 and 2015 rule 2.2 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including online purchase of prohibited products by LF in 2014 and 2015 – attempted use prohibited substance – provisionally suspended without opposition – admitted violation of SADR and asked…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Mitchell Frear
Overview: Anti-doping – ice hockey player (MF) admitted violation of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 rule 3.2 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including online purchase of prohibited product by MF in 2014 – attempted use prohibited substance – provisionally suspended without opposition – admitted violation of SADR and asked to be heard as to sanction…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Michael Butson
Overview: Anti-doping – Rugby league player (B) tested positive for prohibited substance higenamine in sample taken from him after a rugby league training session – provisionally suspended without opposition – admitted violation of Sports Anti-Doping Rules 2016 (SADR) Rule 2.1 and asked to be heard as to sanction – positive test due to contaminated pre-workout supplement…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Adam King
Anastrozole, Possession of prohibited substances/methods, Tamoxifen (3-Hydroxy-4Methoxy-Tamoxifen), Testosterone, Use / attempted use of prohibited substances/methodsOverview: Anti-doping – cricket player (K) admitted violations of Sports Anti-Doping Rules (SADR) 2014 Rules 3.2 and 3.6 and SADR 2015 2.2 and 2.6 – Medsafe investigation into NZ Clenbuterol including purchase of prohibited products by K in 2014 and 2015 – possession and use of steroids nandrolone and testosterone in 2014 and possession and use…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Darren Reiri
Anastrozole, Possession of prohibited substances/methods, Use / attempted use of prohibited substances/methodsOverview: Anti-doping – attempted use and possession of Anastrozole – In May 2013 rugby league player (R) ordered prohibited substance Anastrozole over Internet from a website in India – package of tablets dispatched to him but intercepted by Customs and referred to Medsafe who sent a letter to R advising the package had been intercepted –…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Rodney Newman
Clenbuterol, Failure or refusal to provide sample, Mesterolone, Oxymetholone, Participating in Sport while Suspended, Possession of prohibited substances/methods, Prasterone, Stanozolol, Testosterone, Use / attempted use of prohibited substances/methodsOverview: Anti-doping – lifetime ban imposed on a power lifter (N), who had previously been suspended for an anti-doping violation in 2008, for committing 5 further anti-doping violations. Sports Tribunal proceedings adjourned until separate prosecutions by Ministry of Health against N in District Court completed – District Court found N imported and possessed various prescription medicines…
-
Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Adam Stewart
Overview: Anti-doping – 2 years’ ineligibility imposed on athlete for attempted use, and possession, of prohibited substances (see earlier decision of 8 September 2010) – issue arose whether Tribunal had jurisdiction to consider application to disqualify athlete’s competition results under rule 14.8 of Sports Anti-Doping Rules – Tribunal held it had jurisdiction to consider application (see…
