|
2010 |2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | Results in anti-doping cases
2006
Download written decisions and media releases for cases decided by the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand in 2006.
Boxing New Zealand Inc v Kerry Nathan
(SDT 21/06) - Decision released 21 December 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping – cannabis – recreational use at cousin’s birthday party 2 weeks before tournament where tested positive after winning NZ women’s boxing championship – Tribunal recently released a Minute announcing it will take a new approach to imposing penalties in future cannabis cases – however infraction in present case occurred before release of Minute – case decided on Karaitiana principles (see SDT 12/06, 28/4/06) - not taken for performance enhancing reasons – remorse expressed - no aggravating circumstances justifying suspension – young age of defendant – Tribunal found credibility in claim of 15 year old defendant that she was guilty of momentary lapse of judgment which failed to take account of consequences of her actions – Boxing NZ acknowledged that defendant usually competes at junior levels and entered senior grade only because no other competitors in her junior grade and there was a possibility that defendant may not have been fully informed on anti-doping issues – warning and reprimand imposed – in accordance with WADA Code and Boxing NZ’s rules, Tribunal ordered that defendant disqualified from event and forfeits title.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Rugby League Inc v Vince Whare
(SDT 19/06) - Decision released 28 November 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - second violation - recreational use - used for stress relief during difficult personal circumstances - mandatory 2 years' ineligibility for second violation imposed - would have been banned for life if had not established drug use not for performance enhancing purposes - cross code effect of suspension - suspension backdated to commence on date provisionally suspended by NZ Rugby League.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Rugby League Inc v Blake Milner
(SDT 20/06) - Decision released 24 November 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping – cannabis – recreational use – smoked cannabis three weeks before game where tested - aggravating circumstances justifying suspension - defendant previously signed agreement/declaration with NZ Rugby League that aware of their anti-doping policy – that defendant had been dropped from team at time used cannabis and had not expected to be re-selected and had since taken steps to stop habit of smoking cannabis were relevant factors to length of suspension imposed – rugby league season not officially starting until next year and suspension will be over by then – however, during suspension player unable to train with team or participate in rugby league in any way - cross code effects of suspension – cannot participate in other sports such as touch while suspended - two month’s ineligibility imposed.
Download associated documents:
Daisy Thomas v Surfing New Zealand
(SDT 09/06)
The Tribunal released two decisions in this case: an interim decision (19 April 2006) and a further decision (21 August 2006). The decisions resolve different issues and both need to be read together.
Overview:
Appeal against non-selection for NZ junior surfing team - whether selection criteria properly followed - whether appellant offered reasonable opportunity to satisfy selection criteria - whether bias (one of the selectors had coached rival selected ahead of appellant) - whether material on which the selection decision could be based - deficiencies in SNZ's processes but not sufficient to set aside the selection decision - it could not be said that there was no material on which the selection decision could reasonably be based - appeal dismissed.
Appellant also sought that Tribunal make recommendations to SNZ in relation to revising their selection policy and other procedures - Tribunal declined to make specific recommendations as to the form the rules, policies and criteria should take - Tribunal made general observations about these matters, particularly in relation to selection criteria requiring subjective assessments - costs - exceptional circumstances - while selection appeal was unsuccessful, the appeal had merit - deficiencies identified in SNZ's processes which SNZ are going to rectify - appeal will have beneficial consequences within SNZ - small costs award to appellant appropriate.
Download associated documents:
Basketball New Zealand v Mark Dickel
(SDT 18/06) - Decision released 14 August 2006.
Overview:
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.
Download associated documents:
Timothy Madgwick v Mountain Bike New Zealand
(SDT 17/06) - Decision released 7 August 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against non-selection for NZ Team - appellant chosen for NZ squad but not subsequently selected for NZ team for world champs - selection criteria contain both objective and subjective factors - selectors required to pick strongest team - selection criteria based on domestic and international results with international results given preference - appellant chose to compete internationally with mixed results - selectors considered another rider who competed domestically produced better results and selected him ahead of appellant - selectors entitled to make this assessment - appeal dismissed.
Download associated document:
Katrine Lawton v Mountain Bike New Zealand
(SDT 16/06) - Decision released 7 August 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against non-selection for NZ Team – appellant selected for NZ squad but not subsequently selected for NZ team for world champs - selectors required to pick strongest team - selection criteria based on domestic and international results with international results given preference - appellant in strong position compared to some rivals at time squad selected - appellant subsequently chose to compete domestically and did well - however selectors considered some rival squad members, including some who competed internationally, had produced better results than appellant - selection criteria contained both objective and subjective elements - selectors had to weigh performances of riders competing in different events against different athletes in different parts of the world - not possible to do this without bringing in subjective elements as have to take into account various factors of different races - Tribunal not in a position to make subjective judgments that experienced selectors appointed to make and selectors entitled to make the assessment they did in this case - it could not be not be said that selection criteria were not properly followed or that there was no material on which the decision could have been made - appeal dismissed.
Download associated document:
Binbin Zhu v Table Tennis New Zealand
(SDT 15/06) - Decision released 4 August 2006.
Overview:
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.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Federation of Body Builders Inc v Sam Mohamad
(SDT 03/06) - Decision released 14 July 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - stanozol, hydroclorothiazide and amiloride - defendant failing to participate in proceedings or raise any defence - mandatory 2 years' ineligibility imposed.
Download associated documents:
Touch New Zealand v William Morunga
(SDT 13/06) - Decision released 4 July 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - Touch player's second violation with cannabis - mandatory 2 years' ineligibility for second violation imposed - importance of athletes participating in proceedings - if defendant had not established substance not used for performance enhancing purposes he would have been banned for life for second violation - cross code effect of suspension - any ban imposed as a result of a doping infraction applies to all sports coming under WADA Code and not just the sport athlete was competing in when returned positive drug test - defendant also a promising rugby league player but suspension prevents him participating in that sport also - not appropriate case to backdate suspension.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Power Lifting Federation v Mark Mete
(SDT 04/06) - Decision released 25 May 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - ephedrine - athlete admitted taking ephedrine pills to manage asthma - issue over which anti-doping rules applied - NZPF agreed at 2004 AGM to replace their old constitution and NZPF anti-doping rules with a new constitution and the IPF international federation anti-doping rules (which incorporated WADA code) - NZPF and IPF rules set out different penalties for ephedrine violations - however NZPF never formally adopted the new constitution and rules, even though intended to do so - therefore anti-doping rules that applied were the old NZPF rules which provided for maximum ban of 3 months for ephedrine violations - 3 months' ineligibility imposed.
Download associated documents:
Matthew Claridge v New Zealand Water Polo Association
(SDT 14/06) - Decision released 19 May 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against decision of a national sports organisation - water polo player appealed against a disciplinary decision banning him from 5 matches for biting - parties reaching agreement before hearing and sought orders from Tribunal implementing agreement - Tribunal made such orders - 2 matches remaining out of original 5 match ban - ban on player participating in these 2 matches to be "suspended" for 12 months on certain conditions.
Download associated document:
Softball New Zealand v Curtis Ames
(SDT 10/06) - Decision released 8 May 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - principles set out in Karaitiana decision (SDT 12/06) applied - Canadian player in NZ for softball season - defendant admitted violation and provided letter stating cannabis use was recreational at Christmas celebration and not to enhance performance - moved back to Canada before hearing - player failed to participate in teleconference hearing - Tribunal ruled it could proceed to decide case - onus - standard of proof - if athlete can establish cannabis use not intended to enhance sports performance then eligible to receive a lesser penalty than otherwise mandatory two years' ineligibility - an athlete's failure to participate in hearing and absence of evidence under oath will make it difficult for athlete to satisfy their onus of establishing cannabis use not intended to enhance performance - however Tribunal here granted indulgence to defendant only by reason of concessions from Softball NZ that defendant did not intend to enhance performance and that there were no aggravating factors - warning and reprimand imposed.
Download associated documents:
Softball New Zealand v Lance Abbot
(SDT 11/06) - Decision released 8 May 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - principles set out in Karaitiana decision (SDT 12/06) applied - admitted recreational cannabis use at stag party - elite athletes - level of knowledge and experience - Tribunal found with some reservations that no aggravating circumstances - defendant was former NZ softball representative - last represented NZ in 2001 and was then well informed by Softball NZ of its anti-doping policy - however cannabis only added to list in 2004 - Tribunal accepted with some reservations that defendant was not fully informed in 2005 when used cannabis that was at risk of breaching anti-doping policy - Tribunal warned defendant of his duty to adhere to WADA code and strict liability nature of offences - observations about defendant initially not participating in process and potential adverse consequences if he had not - warning and reprimand imposed.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Federation of Body Builders v Daryll Tomuli
(SDT 02/06) - Decision released 28 April 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - nandrolone - defendant admitted violation - took dietary product supplied by another competitor without checking further - two positive drug tests (at two body building events eight days apart) treated as one violation - Tribunal accepted defendant only took substance once - defendant competed at second event where second drug test taken before he was notified that first test was positive - mandatory two years' ineligibility imposed - suspension backdated to date last competed as defendant voluntarily not competed since then, some delay in processing, co-operation with authorities and agreement to assist in a body building drug education programme.
Download associated documents:
Cody McMaster v Kartsport New Zealand
(SDT 07/06) - Reasons for Decision released 28 April 2006 - Decision released 11 April 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against decision of national sports organisation - appeal against disciplinary penalties - appellant allegedly using motor vehicle in an irresponsible and dangerous manner on a public road outside a Kart race meeting venue - Tribunal concluded appellant had been denied natural justice - summonsed to hearing without being supplied with details of charges against him - told hearing to consider penalty only - reasonable request for adjournment not granted - appeal allowed and penalties quashed.
Download associated documents:
Simon Hunter v Kartsport New Zealand
(SDT 06/06) - Reasons for Decision released 28 April 2006 - Decision released 11 April 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against decision of national sports organisation - appeal against disciplinary penalties imposed as a result of appellant's alleged involvement in a fight after a prize-giving function - Tribunal concluded appellant had been denied natural justice - summonsed to hearing without being supplied with details of charges against him - told hearing to consider penalty only - reasonable request for adjournment not granted - appeal allowed and penalties quashed.
Download associated documents:
Softball New Zealand v Justin Karaitiana
(SDT 12/06) - Decision released 28 April 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - Tribunal reviewed its earlier decisions and set out approach it will take in future cannabis cases - if athlete satisfies Tribunal that no intention to enhance sports performance, the likely penalty will be a reprimand and warning provided Tribunal also satisfied the cannabis use was unrelated to the sport, represented no danger to others and there were no other aggravating circumstances - Tribunal likely to suspend where aggravating circumstances exist - aggravating circumstances include when athlete’s attention has been drawn to need to adhere to WADA Code but despite this warning offends anyway - such warning may appear in participation agreements or may have been specifically drawn to the athlete's attention by his or her sport by other means - Tribunal will take interim and self imposed suspensions into account in determining appropriate period of ineligibility - in this case defendant admitted using cannabis recreationally at New Year’s Eve party the week before tournament where drug tested - aggravating circumstances not found to exist - warning and reprimand imposed.
Download associated documents:
Softball New Zealand v Aaron Neemia
(SDT 08/06) - Decision released 7 April 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - elite athlete - level of knowledge and experience - defendant had been NZ and Samoan representative - defendant admitted violation – attended stag party where people smoking cannabis - claimed positive drug test result may have been due to passive inhalation or he may actually have smoked cannabis himself at party but too intoxicated to remember - Tribunal expressed concerns especially as defendant most likely used cannabis the night before a final and he had been high level softball player for 5 years - however Tribunal did not find aggravating circumstances to justify suspension - no participation agreement and no suggestion from Softball NZ that there were aggravating circumstances - unusual drug testing circumstances - defendant provided two samples: one of which was negative and the other one positive - warning and reprimand imposed.
Download associated documents:
New Zealand Federation of Body Builders v Naera Johnson (SDT 01/06) - Decision released 1 March 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - clenbuterol - defendant admitted violation, advised that she did not want to participate further in the hearing and acknowledged that the Tribunal may impose a penalty without holding a hearing of the parties - no further information provided to warrant imposing any other penalty than the two year period of ineligibility set out in WADA Code - 2 years' ineligibility imposed.
Download associated documents:
Jarrod Mudford v New Zealand Shooting Federation Inc and New Zealand Olympic Committee Inc
(SDT 05/06) – Reasons for Decision released 28 February 2006.
Overview:
Appeal against non-nomination for NZ shooting team to compete at Commonwealth Games - jurisdiction - Tribunal declined jurisdiction to hear appeal - appellant bound by contract with NZ Olympic Committee (NZOC) requiring him to follow specific appeal procedures - appellant did not do so and instead appealed his non-nomination for the team to NZ Shooting Federation (NZSF) who wrongly heard his appeal - NZOC failing to publish selection criteria (including appeal right) as agreed to do under contract – athlete may have been misled by actions of NZOC and NZSF – however under the contract the Tribunal only had jurisdiction to hear the matter if certain procedures set out in contract were complied with and they were not - out of time to appeal to Tribunal under contract - person bound by contract they sign even if don’t understand it or don't read it.
Download associated documents:
Touch New Zealand v Nui Bartlett
(SDT 15/05) - Decision released 31 January 2006.
Overview:
Anti-doping - cannabis - recreational use - intoxication - cross code effect of suspension - defendant was a NZ touch representative, NPC rugby player and potential NZ Sevens rugby player - tested positive for cannabis after playing in touch tournament - the night before tournament he was celebrating being part of rugby team that won NPC second division - claimed so intoxicated that could not remember what happened but accepted he must have used cannabis - that cannabis use occurred while intoxicated not a mitigating factor - Tribunal found aggravating circumstances justifying suspension including defendant previously signed participation agreement not to use prohibited substances, cannabis use occurring night before touch tournament and defendant an experienced player aware of Touch NZ’s strong anti-doping stance - cross code effect of suspension harsh on defendant - after positive test defendant subjected to interim suspension by Touch NZ which also meant he could not play rugby during this time - missed several tournaments affecting chances for selection in NZ Rugby Sevens team, NZ Touch team and potentially impacting on future income from rugby - Tribunal took this into account in determining penalty - three weeks' ineligibility imposed.
Download associated documents:
| 
