The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued an award on March 5, 2015, in the case of Mark Kenzig v. Equestrian Australia Limited (EA). The case involved an anti-doping rule violation concerning the presence of reserpine in a horse under Kenzig's responsibility. The panel, composed of Malcolm Holmes QC, David Grace QC, and Alan Sullivan QC, had previously dismissed Kenzig's appeal against EA's decision that he committed the violation in a partial award dated January 9, 2015. The panel reserved jurisdiction to address sanctions and costs, which were later determined based on written submissions from both parties.
Under Article 10.2 of the Equine Anti-Doping and Controlled Medication Regulations, Kenzig faced a mandatory two-year ineligibility period and a potential $15,000 fine unless fairness dictated otherwise. Kenzig argued that the fine was inappropriate given his circumstances, including the significant impact of the ineligibility on his horse training business, his lack of alternative qualifications, and his voluntary contributions to the sport. EA maintained that the fine should apply, emphasizing that experienced participants in the industry should bear greater responsibility for doping violations.
The panel concluded that fairness warranted not imposing the fine. Key factors included the absence of evidence that Kenzig deliberately doped the horse, the already substantial two-year ineligibility sanction, his limited financial means, and his past contributions to equestrian sports. The panel determined that the sanction should be limited to the two-year ineligibility period, effective from May 20, 2014, to May 19, 2016. The decision underscored the relevance of a person's voluntary contributions to the sport when assessing the appropriateness of additional penalties. The CAS ruled accordingly, imposing only the ineligibility period and no fine.