15. Implementation of Decisions

15. Implementation of Decisions

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

15.1.1 A decision of an anti-doping rule violation made by a Signatory Anti-Doping Organisation, an appellate body (Rule 13.2.2) or CAS shall, after the parties to the proceeding are notified, automatically be binding beyond the parties to the proceeding upon every Signatory in every sport with the effects described below:⁸⁰ 

15.1.1.1 A decision by any of the above-described bodies imposing a Provisional Suspension (after a Provisional Hearing has occurred or the Athlete or other Person has either accepted the Provisional Suspension or has waived the right to a Provisional Hearing, expedited hearing or expedited appeal offered in accordance with Rule 7.4.3) automatically prohibits the Athlete or other Person from participation (as described in Rule 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 Rule 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 automatically binds all Signatories.

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

15.1.2 Each Signatory is under the obligation to recognize and implement a decision and its effects as required by Rule 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 the Commission or other Anti-Doping Organisation, an appellate body or CAS to suspend, or lift, Consequences shall be binding upon each Signatory without any further action required, on the earlier of the date the Signatory receives actual notice of the decision or the date the decision is placed into ADAMS.

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

15.2 Implementation of Other Decisions by Anti-Doping Organisations

Signatories may decide to implement other anti-doping decisions rendered by Anti-Doping Organisations not described in Rule 15.1.1 above, such as a Provisional Suspension prior to Provisional Hearing or acceptance by the Athlete or other Person.⁸¹ 

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 each Signatory if the Signatory 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.⁸² 

Footnotes

^{80 [Comment to Rule 15.1 : By way of example, where the rules of the Major Event Organisation 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 Organisation is binding on other Signatories regardless of whether the Athlete or other Person chooses the expedited appeal option.]}

^{81 [Comment to Rule 15.1 and 15.2: Anti-Doping Organisation decisions under Rule 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 Organisation 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 Organisation, 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 Organisation. Implementation of Anti-Doping Organisations’ decisions under Rule 15.2 is subject to each Signatory’s discretion. A Signatory’s implementation of a decision under Rule 15.1 or 15.2 is not appealable separately from any appeal of the underlying decision. The extent of recognition of TUE decisions of other Anti-Doping Organisations shall be determined by Rule 4.4 and the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.]}

^{82 [Comment to Rule 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, the Sports Tribunal 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 the Sports Tribunal should recognise the finding of an anti-doping rule violation and should conduct a hearing consistent with Article 8 to determine whether the longer period of Ineligibility provided these Rules should be imposed. A Signatory’s implementation of a decisions or its decision not to implement a decision under Rule 15.3, is appealable under Rule 13.]}