CAS 2008/A/1591 & 1592 & 1616 Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) v. Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Cycling Australia (CA), Nathan O’Neill
Court of Arbitration for Sport · Sports (CAS) · International (Switzerland) · 16/01/2009
Why it matters
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) v. Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Cycling Australia (CA), Nathan O’Neill, an anti-doping case in cycling decided by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, the final tribunal of world sport. The Court held that the appeal was upheld. For a student, it shows how CAS applies the World Anti-Doping Code: the athlete bears a heavy burden to explain an adverse finding, and CAS reviews both the science and the sanction afresh.
Summary
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) v. Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Cycling Australia (CA), Nathan O’Neill: an anti-doping case in cycling before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, decided 16/01/2009. The Court held that the appeal was upheld. The full award is available from CAS.
The detail
Parties: Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) v. Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), Cycling Australia (CA), Nathan O’Neill
Case number: CAS 2008/A/1591 & 1592 & 1616
Outcome: Upheld
Applicable law: The relevant federation regulations; Swiss law; the CAS Code.
Issues in play: an anti-doping case
Read the full decision at Court of Arbitration for Sport ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.