What is Locus Standi?

Locus Standi is a platform for the dispute-resolution world. It brings together arbitration, mediation and adjudication events, jobs and internships, and landmark arbitral awards explained in plain English, alongside the qualifications and pathways into the field. It was established in London at LIDW26 by the alumni of Queen Mary University of London.

Can Locus Standi help me understand a dispute?

Yes. Locus Standi offers free dispute help: paste your contract's dispute-resolution clause and a short note on what happened, and it works out the type of dispute, the governing law, your options, the right forum to file in, and drafts a basic document to start from, all in plain English.

What is the agentic AI case officer?

Locus Standi's workspace includes an AI case officer that helps practitioners run their matters: tracking stages and deadlines, raising alerts, organising to-dos and documents, and drafting. It is built for arbitrators, mediators and the institutions that administer disputes.

Where can I find arbitration events and internships?

Locus Standi keeps a live calendar of arbitration, mediation and adjudication events with one-tap calendar export, and a board of arbitration jobs and internships from institutions including the PCA, ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC and AIAC.

TAS 2022 A 9126 Erick Rivera c. FIFA (CAS)

Why it matters

This case reinforces the strict liability principle in anti-doping, placing a high burden on athletes to explain the presence of prohibited substances and demonstrate lack of intent or significant negligence. It highlights the CAS's consistent stance on the limited evidentiary value of polygraph tests in doping cases and the necessity for athletes to meticulously document all treatments and verify substance legality, even when administered by team medical staff. The decision underscores the importance of athlete responsibility in maintaining a clean sport.

Summary

Erick Alejandro Rivera, a Salvadoran professional football player, was sanctioned with a four-year suspension by the FIFA Disciplinary Committee after testing positive for Clostebol, an anabolic androgenic steroid, following a World Cup qualifier in September 2021. The suspension was effective from October 5, 2021, to October 5, 2025. Rivera appealed this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking a reduction of the sanction to 12 or 24 months, arguing a lack of intent or significant fault. Rivera presented two main explanations for the positive test: first, the use of "Dermovate" cream on a new tattoo, and second, an injection of Dexamethasone administered by the national team doctor for an ankle sprain. He also vaguely mentioned taking vitamins. The CAS Panel, applying the FIFA Disciplinary Code (CDF) and FIFA Anti-Doping Regulations (RAF) (2021 edition), and subsidiarily Swiss law, rejected Rivera's explanations. Expert analysis confirmed that "Dermovate" cream contains Clobetasol, not Clostebol, and there is no metabolic pathway for Clobetasol to convert to Clostebol. Regarding the injection, while Dexamethasone is a permitted treatment for sprains outside of competition, it was not detected in Rivera's sample, and it is not a prohibited substance in competition if administered correctly and with sufficient time before the match. The Panel found no evidence that the injection contained Clostebol or that the team doctor acted negligently. Rivera also failed to provide specific details or proof regarding the alleged vitamin intake. The CAS emphasized the principle of strict liability in anti-doping, meaning athletes are personally responsible for any prohibited substance found in their body, regardless of intent. To reduce a sanction, an athlete must coherently and credibly explain how the substance entered their system and demonstrate a lack of intent or significant negligence. Rivera's attempts to use a polygraph test to prove his lack of intent were also rejected, as CAS jurisprudence, aligned with Swiss law, generally deems polygraph tests inadmissible as per se evidence. Ultimately, the CAS found that Rivera failed to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, how Clostebol entered his system or that his anti-doping rule violation was unintentional or without significant fault. Consequently, the CAS dismissed Rivera's appeal and fully upheld the FIFA Disciplinary Committee's four-year suspension.

The detail

Parties: TAS 2022 A 9126 Erick Rivera c. FIFA

Outcome: The Court of Arbitration for Sport dismissed Erick Alejandro Rivera's appeal and confirmed the FIFA Disciplinary Committee's decision to impose a four-year suspension for an anti-doping rule violation.

Quantum: CHF 1,000

Applicable law: FIFA Disciplinary Code (CDF), FIFA Anti-Doping Regulations (RAF) (2021 edition), and subsidiarily Swiss law.

Issues in play: The case primarily involved the strict liability principle in anti-doping, requiring the athlete to prove the source of the prohibited substance and lack of intent or significant negligence to reduce a sanction. Key provisions included Article 17 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code and Articles 6 and 20.1(a) of the FIFA Anti-Doping Regulations.

Read the full decision at Court of Arbitration for Sport (football, via FIFA) ↗

Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.

Back to the awards board