Tue, May 11, 2021

Ellis Richards v UKAD (First Instance & Appeal)

A decision in the appeal of Ellis Richards v UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP), along with the first instance decision.

On 13 August 2018 Mr Ellis Richards, a rugby union player at Cardiff Metropolitan University Rugby Football Club, provided a urine Sample Out of Competition.  The next day, and in the days that followed, discussions were held between Mr Richards and his Strength and Conditioning Coach, where it is was alleged Mr Richards admitted to taking a Prohibited Substance (Clenbuterol). 

On 04 October 2018, Mr Richards was informed that no Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods were detected in the analysis of the urine Sample.  An interview was held between Mr Richards and UKAD on 28 November 2018, where the issue of whether Clenbuterol had been taken arose.  Mr Richards accepted that he had made the admission, but stated that he was unsure as to the substance he had actually taken, and that the Clenbuterol reference had been speculative.

Mr Richards was subsequently charged on 07 May 2019, with a breach of ADR Article 2.2 for the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in his Sample.  The NADP Tribunal, consisting of Mark Hovell, Professor Kitrina Douglas, and Professor Gordon McInnes, found Mr Richards had breached ADR Article 2.2. A period of Ineligibility of four years was imposed under ADR Article 10.2.

On 16 March 2020, Mr Richards appealed the NADP’s decision.  The NADP Appeal Tribunal, consisting of William Norris QC, Professor Dorian Haskard and Dr Tim Rogers upheld the NADP Tribunal’s decision, and Mr Richards’ appeal was dismissed. His period of ineligibility runs from 7 May 2019, the date of his Provisional Suspension.

Copies of the full decisions 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

• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal
• UKAD v Ellis RichardsFirst Instance
• Ellis Richards v UKADAppeal