Follow Us

UK Anti-Doping v Paul Bird

March 06, 2019 | Motorsport | Arbitration

Spacer

Summary

  • Sport: Motorsport
  • Issue: Arbitration
  • Type: Anti-Doping
  • Tribunal: Christopher Quinlan QC, Lorraine Johnson , Dr Tim Rogers
  • Decision date: 08 January 2019
  • Outcome: A period of Ineligibility imposed by the Tribunal was eight (8) years.

A decision in the case of UK Anti-doping (UKAD) v Paul Bird has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP). On 14 April 2017, rally driver Paul Bird was selected to provide and In-Competition test following the third stage of the British Trial and Rally Drivers Association BTRDA Gold star Rally Championships, however Mr Bird did not give a sample.  He was subsequently charged with an Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV) for Evading to submit to sample collection under Anti-Doping Rule (ADR) Article 2.3.

UKAD sought to establish that Mr Bird refused, without compelling justification, to submit to sample collection and that his conduct was intentional.  After assessing Mr Bird’s conduct, the NADP Tribunal consisting of Christopher Quinlan QC (Chairman), Lorraine Johnson, and Dr Tim Rogers determined the applicable period of Ineligibility to be imposed should be 8 years, as this was Mr Bird’s second Anti-Doping Rule Violation. Mr Bird’s ban will run from 11 July 2018, the date of notification of the charge, until midnight on 10 July 2026

Related Documents

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

Scroll To Top