Wed, February 26, 2020

UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Mark Dry (Appeal)


  • Sport: Athletics
  • Issue: Arbitration
  • Type: Anti-Doping
  • Tribunal: Charles Hollander QC, Michelle Duncan, Kitrina Douglas
  • Decision date: 25 February 2020
  • Outcome: 4 years ineligibility.

Decision Details

A decision in the case of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Mark Dry has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel Appeal Tribunal.

On 8th May 2019 Mr Dry was charged by UKAD with an anti-doping rule violation in connection with allegedly tampering with part of the Doping Control Process by providing or allowing the provision of false information regarding his whereabouts. This charge was dismissed on 8th October 2019 by the First Instance National Anti-Doping Tribunal, UKAD then appealed this decision.

The Appeal panel, consisting of Charles Hollander QC, Michelle Duncan and Dr Kitrina Douglas, found that the athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to Article 2.5 of the 2018 IAAF rules and therefore ruled that a period of ineligibility of four years would be imposed upon Mr Dry. 

A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related documents tab on the right-hand side.

The National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) is the United Kingdom’s independent tribunal responsible for adjudicating anti-doping disputes in sport. It is operated by Sport Resolutions and is entirely independent of UK Anti-Doping who is responsible for investigating, charging and prosecuting cases before the NADP.