Skip to content

Drug Free Sport New Zealand v Nick Rhind


Anti-doping – cannabis – athlete filed notice admitting violation, advising he did not want to participate in the hearing and acknowledging Tribunal may impose a penalty without holding a hearing – penalty for violation is 2 years’ suspension but if athlete can establish requirements set out under “specified substances” provisions of Rules (concerning establishing did not intend to enhance sports performance, establishing how got in system and providing corroboration), athlete may be eligible for lesser penalty – because of potential consequences of not participating and not establishing these requirements under “specified substances” provisions of the Rules, Tribunal sent notice to athlete advising that if he took no action Tribunal was required to suspend him for two years – athlete given an opportunity to review his notice but never responded despite follow up notices, letters and e-mails reminding him of consequences of not participating and informing him of the details of hearing – athlete did not participate in hearing and made no further contact to explain why – Tribunal satisfied athlete had been made fully aware of requirements – as he had not sought to rely on the “specified substances” provisions he was not eligible for a reduced penalty and Tribunal had no option but to impose mandatory penalty of two years’ suspension.

Back To Top