Decision: UK Anti-Doping v Anton Grady

Decision: UK Anti-Doping v Anton Grady

A Decision in the case of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Anton Grady has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).

On 12 March 2017, basketball player Anton Grady was subject to an In-Competition test at a match between Leeds Force and Plymouth Raiders. Analysis of Mr Grady’s urine sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding for Carboxy-THC, a metabolite of cannabis. Mr Grady was subsequently charged with, and admitted, an Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV) for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance under Anti-Doping Rule (ADR) 2.1.

The NADP Tribunal consisting of Jeremy Summers (Chairman), Dr Terry Crystal and Graham Edmunds determined that Mr Grady had not acted intentionally, as defined in ADR 10.2.3, meaning the period of Ineligibility should be two (2) years, unless further reduced under ADR 10.5. After assessing Mr Grady’s level of fault, the Tribunal imposed a period of 15-months Ineligibility.

Mr Grady’s ban will run from 12 March 2017, the date of sample collection, until midnight on 11 June 2018.

The full NADP 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 in accordance with its own procedural rules and is entirely independent of UK Anti-Doping, who are responsible for investigating, charging and prosecuting cases before the NADP.