Follow Us

UKAD v Carl Hone

June 01, 2021 | Rugby Union | Arbitration

Spacer

Summary

  • Sport: Rugby Union
  • Issue: Arbitration
  • Type: Anti-Doping
  • Tribunal: Robert Englehart QC , Professor Peter Sever, Carole Billington-Wood
  • Decision date: 06 May 2021
  • Outcome: 4 years ineligibility

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

On 06 February 2020, Mr Carl Hone, a rugby union player in Wales registered with Llanhilleth RFC, provided urine Sample Out-of-Competition. Sample analysis returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (“AAF”) for Boldenone.  

Mr Hone was subsequently charged on 12 October 2020 with a breach of ADR Article 2.1 for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in his Sample. Mr Hone admitted the Anti-Doping Rule Violation on 02 November 2020. 

The NADP Tribunal, consisting of Robert Englehart QC (Chair), Professor Peter Sever and Carole Billington-Wood established that Mr Hone had committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation contrary to ADR Art. 2.1, and therefore imposed a period of Ineligibility of 4 years, commencing on 06 February 2020 until midnight on 05 February 2024.

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.

Related Documents

Should you require Sport Resolutions to conduct and manage an investigation, review or inquiry, please contact us.

Scroll To Top