Mon, January 04, 2021

Adam Carr v UKAD (First Instance & Appeal)


  • Sport: Rugby League
  • Issue: Arbitration
  • Type: Anti-Doping
  • Tribunal: Charles Hollander QC, Blondel Thompson, Dr Tim Rogers
  • Decision date: 03 December 2020
  • Outcome: 4 years ineligibility

Decision Details

A decision in the case of Adam Carr v UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).

On 09 December 2019 Mr Adam Carr, a rugby football league player at Rochdale Hornets RLFC, provided a urine Sample Out-of-Competition.  The urine Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding for Clenbuterol.

Mr Carr was subsequently charged on 28 February 2020, with a breach of ADR Article 2.1 for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in his Sample. The NADP Tribunal, consisting of Kate Gallafent QC, Colin Murdock and Professor Nicol Ferrier, found Mr Carr had violated ADR Article 2.1 and an Anti-Doping Rule Violation had been committed.  A period of Ineligibility of four years was imposed under ADR Article 10.2.1, and this period is to run from the date of Sample collection on 09 December 2019 until 08 December 2023.

On 19 August 2020, Mr Carr appealed the decision issued on 30 July 2020.  The NADP Appeal Tribunal, consisting of Charles Hollander QC, Blondel Thompson and Dr Tim Rogers found that the Tribunal at first instance were entitled to reach their conclusion, that Mr Carr had breached ADR Article 2.1 and therefore the appeal was dismissed.

A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related links 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.