Mon, August 12, 2024
UK Anti-Doping v Bevan Jay
A decision in the case of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) against Bevan Jay has been issued by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).
On 16 August 2023, Welsh Rugby Union player Bevan Jay was notified by UKAD that he may have committed Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) for Presence of a Prohibited Substance, ostarine, in a Sample taken on 11 July 2023 and Use of the same Prohibited Substance. This notification further mentioned that he was provisionally suspended.
On 25 September 2023, UKAD formally issued Mr Jay with a Notice of Charge for committing the ADRVs pursuant to Anti-Doping Rules (ADR) Articles 2.1 and 2.2. The National Anti-Doping Tribunal, comprised of David Casement KC (Chair), Professor Kitrina Douglas and Professor Isla Mackenzie, who were appointed to determine this matter. Mr Jay did not dispute that he had committed ADRVs but he stated that the ADRVs were not intentional and that there was No Significant Fault or Negligence. UKAD did not dispute Mr Jay’s position on his intention in relation to the ADRVs but did not accept that there had been No Significant Fault or Negligence. The issue before the Tribunal was to determine the period of Ineligibility.
Mr Jay denied ever using prohibited substances and stated that he never intentionally violated any anti-doping rules. However, he gave evidence that he had used three supplements in the period before the Sample was provided on 11 July 2023 and identified these as the potential source of the ostarine. These supplements were not declared on the Doping Control form that he completed and signed when he provided the Sample and the first time a Fat Burner supplement was disclosed to UKAD was in a response to specific questions UKAD raised in March 2024. It was not mentioned in the Respondent’s letter of 27 August 2023 nor his response of 3 October 2023 to the charge letter.
The Tribunal determined that there was unchallenged evidence showing that Mr Jay’s urine Sample contained ostarine. Consequently the Tribunal was satisfied that there were ADRVs under ADR articles 2.1 and 2.2. The Tribunal then analysed whether these ADRVs were intentional and concluded that Mr Jay did not satisfy the Tribunal given that his overall explanation amounted to no more than speculation about how ostarine came to be in his system. Further, the medical evidence submitted found the quantity of ostarine found in the Sample was much higher than has been previously found in contaminated supplements.
Accordingly, the Tribunal was satisfied that Mr Jay had committed the ADRVs pursuant to ADR Article 2.1 and Article 2.2 and imposed a period of Ineligibility of four years. Given that Mr Jay had been subject to a Provisional Suspension since 16 August 2023 and there was no evidence that he had not observed the Provisional Suspension, the four-year period of Ineligibility was set to run from 16 August 2023 and end at midnight 15 August 2027.
The National Anti-Doping Panel 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 Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
- UKAD v Bevan JayDecision
