World Anti-Doping Code Commentary Project

The first fully comprehensive resource for anti-doping practitioners, providing guidance along all steps of the doping control process. With topics ranging from signatory compliance to application of the sanctioning regime, the commentary will assist the anti-doping movement to achieve a more effective implementation and harmonized interpretation of the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code.

Yearly Archives: 2016

/2016
­

The Significance of Maria Sharapova’s Fault

CAS Award: CAS 2016/A/4643, Maria Sharapova v. ITF, 30 September 2016. This Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) award puts (at least for the moment)[1] an end to Maria Sharapova (or the “Player”)’s doping ordeal stemming from her admitted Use of Meldonium, a substance added to WADA’s Prohibited List less than a month before she [...]

By |November 23rd, 2016|No Significant Fault or Negligence|0 Comments

Cocaine blues: What the Paolini case suggests about “recreational” drug use under the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code

The Paolini decision, which was decided by the Union Cycliste Internationale’s (“UCI”) anti-doping tribunal (the “UCI Tribunal”) provides insight into the question of how Prohibited Substances used “recreationally” could be treated under the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code (the “WADC”). “Recreational” drug use was the subject of much debate among stakeholders during the WADC’s 2015 review [...]

Meldonium and Moral Fault: Five Lessons Learned from the Sharapova ITF Tribunal Decision

In Fall 2015, WADA announced its decision to add the anti-ischemic drug “Meldonium” to its Prohibited List with effect on 1 January 2016, after the Monitoring Program and observation period 2015 revealed “evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance” (Explanatory Notice to the 2016 List). Few observers could have predicted [...]