Ryan Napoleon, a 20-year-old Australian professional swimmer, appealed a decision by the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA) regarding a doping violation. During an out-of-competition test on November 16, 2009, Formoterol, a prohibited substance, was detected in his system. Napoleon, who has asthma, explained that the positive result stemmed from mistakenly using his father’s inhaler, which had been incorrectly labeled by a pharmacist. The inhaler, believed to contain Pulmicort (for which Napoleon had a Therapeutic Use Exemption), actually contained Symbicort, which includes Formoterol. The mix-up occurred due to shared storage of medications in the family home. FINA’s Doping Panel acknowledged the unusual circumstances but ruled that Napoleon’s storage practices fell below the expected standard of care for an elite athlete. While they found no intent to cheat, they imposed a three-month ineligibility period starting from the hearing date (August 20, 2010) and disqualified his results from November 16, 2009, to April 6, 2010.
Napoleon appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking to overturn the decision or reduce the sanction. He argued for a finding of "No Fault or Negligence" or a lesser penalty, such as a reprimand or shorter ineligibility period, and requested that his post-November 2009 results not be disqualified. The CAS Panel reviewed the case, focusing on whether Napoleon demonstrated "utmost caution" and whether the circumstances warranted leniency. The Panel upheld FINA’s decision, ruling that Napoleon failed to prove "No Fault or Negligence" due to inadequate care in managing his medication. However, they recognized the unintentional nature of the violation and the lack of performance-enhancing intent. The CAS adjusted the sanction period, ruling that the ineligibility would commence earlier, on June 14, 2010, and conclude on the award's issuance date, accounting for procedural delays. They also modified the disqualification period, limiting it to November 16, 2009, to January 29, 2010, alongside the concurrent disqualification during the adjusted sanction period (June to August 2010), citing fairness given the delays.
The case underscores the importance of athletes exercising extreme caution with medications and highlights the balance between strict anti-doping enforcement and fairness in exceptional circumstances. The final decision maintained the three-month ineligibility but adjusted the disqualification period, emphasizing the need for athletes to adhere to stringent anti-doping standards while ensuring procedural fairness. The ruling also reinforced the principle that third-party errors do not absolve athletes of their responsibility under anti-doping regulations. The CAS partially upheld Napoleon’s appeal, modifying the sanction and disqualification periods to account for procedural delays, but ultimately affirmed the importance of personal accountability in maintaining the integrity of the anti-doping system.