15.1     Automatic Binding Effect of Decisions by Signatory Anti-Doping Organisations

15.1     Automatic Binding Effect of Decisions by Signatory Anti-Doping Organisations

15.1.1     A decision of an anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 made by a Signatory Anti-Doping Organisation, an appellate body (Article 13.2.2 of the Code) or CAS shall, after the parties to the proceeding are notified, automatically be binding beyond the parties to the proceeding upon the Commission  and any National Sporting Organisation , as well as every Signatory in every sport with the effects described below:

15.1.1.1     A decision by any of the above-described bodies imposing a Provisional Suspension automatically prohibits the Athlete or other Person from participation (as described in Article 10.14.1) in all sports within the authority of any Signatory during the Provisional Suspension.

15.1.1.2     A decision by any of the above-described bodies imposing a period of Ineligibility (after a hearing has occurred or been waived) automatically prohibits the Athlete or other Person from participation (as described in Article 10.14.1) in all sports within the authority of any Signatory for the period of Ineligibility.

15.1.1.3     A decision by any of the above-described bodies accepting an anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 automatically binds all Signatories.

15.1.1.4    A decision by any of the above-described bodies to Disqualify results under Article 10.10 for a specified period automatically Disqualifies all results obtained within the authority of any Signatory during the specified period.

15.1.2     The Commission and any National Sporting Organisation shall recognize and implement a decision and its effects as required by Article 15.1.1, without any further action required, on the earlier of the date the Commission  receives actual notice of the decision or the date the decision is placed into ADAMS.

15.1.3     A decision by an Anti-Doping Organisation, an appellate body or CAS to suspend, or lift, Consequences shall be binding upon the Commission, National Sporting Organisations, without any further action required, on the earlier of the date the Commission receives actual notice of the decision or the date the decision is placed into ADAMS.

15.1.4     Notwithstanding any provision in Article 15.1.1, however, a decision of an anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 by a Major Event Organisation made in an expedited process during an Event shall not be binding on the Commission or National Sporting Organisations unless the rules of the Major Event Organisation provide the Athlete or other Person with an opportunity to an appeal under non-expedited procedures.¹⁰³ 

15.2    Implementation of Other Decisions by Anti-Doping Organisations

15.2    Implementation of Other Decisions by Anti-Doping Organisations

The Commission may decide to implement other anti-doping decisions rendered by Anti-Doping Organisations not described in Article 15.1.1 above.¹⁰⁴  In such circumstances, such decisions shall be automatically implemented by National Sporting Organisations. 

15.3    Implementation of Decisions by Body that is not a Signatory

15.3    Implementation of Decisions by Body that is not a Signatory

An anti-doping decision by a body that is not a Signatory to the Code shall be implemented by the Commission, if the Commission finds that the decision purports to be within the authority of that body and the anti-doping rules of that body are otherwise consistent with the Code.¹⁰⁵  In such circumstances, such decisions shall be automatically implemented by the National Sporting Organisations.

Footnotes

¹⁰³       [Comment to Article 15.1.4: By way of example, where the rules of the Major Event Organization give the Athlete or other Person the option of choosing an expedited CAS appeal or a CAS appeal under normal CAS procedure, the final decision or adjudication by the Major Event Organization is binding on other Signatories regardless of whether the Athlete or other Person chooses the expedited appeal option.]

104    [Comment to Articles 15.1 and 15.2: Anti-Doping Organization decisions under Article 15.1 are implemented automatically by other Signatories without the requirement of any decision or further action on the Signatories’ part. For example, when a National Anti-Doping Organization decides to Provisionally Suspend an Athlete, that decision is given automatic effect at the International Federation level. To be clear, the “decision” is the one made by the National Anti-Doping Organization, there is not a separate decision to be made by the International Federation. Thus, any claim by the Athlete that the Provisional Suspension was improperly imposed can only be asserted against the National Anti-Doping Organization. Implementation of Anti-Doping Organizations’ decisions under Article 15.2 is subject to each Signatory’s discretion. A Signatory’s implementation of a decision under Article 15.1 or Article 15.2 is not appealable separately from any appeal of the underlying decision. The extent of recognition of Therapeutic Use Exemption decisions of other Anti-Doping Organizations shall be determined by Article 4.4 and the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.]

¹⁰⁵     [Comment to Article 15.3: Where the decision of a body that has not accepted the Code is in some respects Code compliant and in other respects not Code compliant, Signatories should attempt to apply the decision in harmony with the principles of the Code. For example, if in a process consistent with the Code a non-Signatory has found an Athlete to have committed an anti-doping rule violation on account of the presence of a Prohibited Substance in the Athlete’s body but the period of Ineligibility applied is shorter than the period provided for in the Code, then all Signatories should recognize the finding of an anti-doping rule violation and the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization should conduct a hearing consistent with Article 8 to determine whether the longer period of Ineligibility provided in the Code should be imposed. A Signatory’s implementation of a decision or its decision not to implement a decision under Article 15.3, is appealable under Article 13.]