Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) v. A.

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Association Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) v. A. (a Russian boxer)
Case no.
CAS 2024/A/10570
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration (2023 edition)
Treaty
Appeal clause: Article 15.2.1 of the All-Russian Anti-Doping Rules (RUSADA ADR), read with the definition of International-Level Athlete in the IBA Anti-Doping Rules
Tribunal
Heiner Kahlert (Sole Arbitrator)
Sector
Boxing; anti-doping (whereabouts failures)
Outcome
CAS declined jurisdiction (3 December 2024) because the athlete was not an International-Level Athlete when the alleged violation occurred.

The dispute

RUSADA, the National Anti-Doping Organisation for Russia, recorded three Missed Tests against the athlete, a Russian boxer, on 4 August 2022, 8 May 2023 and 10 June 2023. He had been removed from the IBA Registered Testing Pool on 7 June 2022 and placed in RUSADA's Registered Testing Pool on 14 June 2022. On 23 April 2024 the RUSADA Disciplinary Anti-Doping Division (DADC) held that the second and third Missed Tests could not be upheld, so no violation of Article 4.4 of the RUSADA ADR had been committed. RUSADA appealed to CAS and sought the standard two-year period of Ineligibility. It argued that the athlete was an International-Level Athlete because of his participation in the Tokyo 2020 Olympics and in two IBA Champions' Night events. The athlete objected that CAS lacked jurisdiction and that the appeal belonged before the National Appeal Body under Article 15.2.2 of the RUSADA ADR.

Key holdings

  1. Bifurcation was ordered under Article R55(5) of the CAS Code. The jurisdictional objection was not frivolous, was distinct from the merits, and would dispose of the whole dispute if upheld. ¶¶ 66–68
  2. Since the alleged violation did not occur during an International Event, CAS has jurisdiction only if the athlete was an International-Level Athlete. The relevant time is when the alleged violation occurred, that is, the third Missed Test. The award dates this to 10 June 2023 at ¶ 82 and refers to 13 June 2023 at ¶¶ 92–93 and 100. It is not the date the appeal was filed. ¶¶ 71, 81–82
  3. The athlete's participation in the Tokyo Olympics (final bout on 7 August 2021) did not make him an International-Level Athlete at the relevant time. The IBA rules refer to participation in the present tense. Any period of status around an event would have to be short and could not stretch over 22 months. ¶¶ 83–92
  4. The Dubai (9 December 2023) and Serpukhov (12 July 2024) Champions' Night events took place after the alleged violation, so they cannot found jurisdiction. In any case, the IBA did not publish them on its website with the clear and specific indication its rules require, so participation in them could not confer International-Level status. The ITA's testing and results-management role at those events did not change this. ¶¶ 93–98
  5. The athlete's sporting level is irrelevant under the IBA ADR. His inclusion in the RUSADA testing pool, his invitation to the Moscow parade, the level of his professional opponents and the ITA's email of 23 September 2024 do not make him an International-Level Athlete. The Sole Arbitrator is not bound by the ITA's view on the legal question. ¶¶ 99–100
  6. CAS has no jurisdiction to hear RUSADA's appeal of 13 May 2024 against the DADC decision of 23 April 2024. All other motions are dismissed. The cost rulings are redacted in the published award. ¶ 101; operative part

Procedural history

  1. 4 August 2022 – 10 June 2023RUSADA records three Missed Tests against the athlete.
  2. 23 April 2024The RUSADA DADC (decision no. 42/2024) finds that no anti-doping rule violation was committed.
  3. 13 May 2024RUSADA files its Statement of Appeal with CAS.
  4. 13 June 2024The President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division submits the dispute to a sole arbitrator over the athlete's objection.
  5. 15 July 2024The Panel is constituted, with Heiner Kahlert as Sole Arbitrator.
  6. 18 July 2024The athlete files a motion for bifurcation and termination.
  7. 8 August 2024The Sole Arbitrator bifurcates the proceedings on jurisdiction. No hearing is held.
  8. 3 December 2024Award: CAS declines jurisdiction.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
  • Heiner Kahlert Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.

Case ID
CAS 2024/A/10570
Claimant
Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA)
Respondent
A.
Documents

Procedure: Appeal
Sport: Boxing
Matter: Doping
Outcome: Jurisdiction denied
Panel: Heiner Kahlert
Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport case database.