The case involves Emil Hoch, an Austrian cross-country skiing coach, who appealed against sanctions imposed by the International Ski Federation (FIS) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) following a doping scandal during the 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed the case de novo, independently reassessing all facts and legal aspects without being bound by prior proceedings. The case centered on Hoch's involvement in a doping conspiracy, where he was found in possession of medical equipment and substances linked to doping practices during a police raid. The seized items included infusion equipment, needles, blood traces, and other materials indicative of doping. Hoch admitted to collecting these items from athletes for disposal but left Turin abruptly after the raid. The FIS Doping Panel (FDP) convicted Hoch for assisting in anti-doping rule violations under Articles 2.6.2 and 2.8 of the FIS Anti-Doping Rules (ADR), imposing a two-year ineligibility for one violation and a lifetime ban for another. Hoch appealed to the CAS, arguing procedural and substantive flaws in the FDP's decision. Procedurally, he claimed violations of fundamental rights under Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the right to a reasoned decision and due process. The CAS, however, noted that its de novo review remedied any procedural deficiencies, ensuring fair proceedings. Substantively, the CAS examined whether Hoch knowingly assisted in doping violations. Evidence, including seized materials and expert testimony, confirmed his complicity in the doping network. The panel found that Hoch's actions objectively supported the violations, given his role as a coach and his selective disposal of incriminating items. The FDP had imposed a lifetime ban, the maximum penalty under Article 10.4.2 of the FIS ADR for serious violations. While the CAS acknowledged the gravity of Hoch's actions, it emphasized proportionality, noting that others may have held greater responsibility in the conspiracy. Consequently, the CAS reduced the sanction to 15 years of ineligibility, starting from the date of the first hearing in September 2007. The decision underscores the CAS's authority to review doping cases comprehensively and the importance of proportionality in sanctions, balancing severe penalties for egregious misconduct with the individual's role in the scheme. The ruling partially upheld Hoch's appeal, modifying the FDP's decision, and dismissed all other claims, concluding that Hoch would be ineligible until September 2022. The case highlights the rigorous legal standards applied in anti-doping enforcement and the intersection of sports law with broader legal principles.