Overview:

Anti-doping – Benzylpiperazine (BZP) – defendant admitted violation – stated positive result due to her using a product purchased from health food store to help elevate her mood, energy and well-being – product stated on label that it contained BZP – defendant stated she knew it contained BZP but did not realise that BZP was a prohibited substance – Tribunal noted earlier BZP case of NZFBB v Ligaliga (SDT 11/05, 16 December 2005) – strict duty on athletes not to take prohibited substances and only in exceptional circumstances will an athlete be able to show no significant fault or negligence – use of product in which BZP was labeled as an ingredient represented a degree of carelessness – defendant unable to rely on no significant fault or negligence exception – 2 years’ ineligibility imposed (backdated to date last competed).