Wed, October 19, 2022

UK Anti-Doping v Ben Harrison


  • Sport: Rugby League
  • Issue: Arbitration
  • Type: Anti-Doping
  • Tribunal: Dame Anne Rafferty DBE , Katherine Apps, Dr Gary O’Driscoll
  • Decision date: 06 September 2022
  • Outcome: 4 years ineligibility

Decision Details

A decision in the matter of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Ben Harrison has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).

On 28 April 2021, Mr Ben Harrison, a professional Rugby League player, provided blood and urine Samples Out-of-Competition. The Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for drostanolone.

Mr Harrison was subsequently charged on 20 July 2021, with a breach of ADR Articles 2.1 for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in his Sample, and ​2.2 for Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method. The issue considered in relation to the Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) was what the appropriate sanction should Mr Harrison receive under Article 10. The NADP Tribunal which consisted of Dame Anne Rafferty DBE (Chair), Katherine Apps and Dr Gary O’Driscoll confirmed Mr Harrison had committed the ADRVs in relation to ADR Articles 2.1 and ADR Article 2.2, as the burden of whether the ADRVs were ‘intentional’ as defined in ADR Article 10.2.3 was not discharged by Mr Harrison. A period of Ineligibility of four years was imposed commencing on 11 June 2021 and ending 23:59 on 10 June 2025.

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.