The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a consent award on 8 February 2017, resolving an anti-doping case involving beach volleyball player Maria Elisa Mendes Ticon Antonelli, the Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB), and the Confederação Brasileira de Voleibol (CBV). The case stemmed from Antonelli's positive test for hydrochlorothiazide, a prohibited substance, during an out-of-competition test on 10 March 2016. The Brazilian Anti-Doping Authority confirmed the adverse finding in both her A and B samples. Initially, the Superior Tribunal de Justiça Desportiva do Voleibol (STJDV) absolved Antonelli of violating Article 2.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) but imposed a 45-day suspension under Article 10.5, effective from her voluntary provisional suspension on 14 April 2016. The FIVB appealed this decision to CAS, seeking a stricter sanction.
During the arbitration process, the parties reached a settlement agreement on 5 December 2016. Antonelli admitted to an anti-doping rule violation under FIVB regulations but presented evidence that the positive test resulted from contamination in a supplement prescribed by her doctor. The settlement imposed a 90-day period of ineligibility, crediting her with 40 days already served (from 14 April to 24 May 2016) and requiring her to serve the remaining 50 days from 5 December 2016 to 24 January 2017. The agreement also permitted the FIVB to communicate the violation and sanction to relevant authorities and publish the decision in accordance with its regulations.
A CAS panel composed of Prof. Martin Schimke, The Hon. Michael Beloff QC, and Mr. Jeffrey Benz reviewed the settlement to ensure it was genuine, not manipulated, and compliant with public policy and applicable laws. Finding no issues, the panel ratified the agreement and incorporated it into a consent award, thereby terminating the arbitration. The award upheld the settlement terms, including the sharing of arbitration costs and each party bearing its own legal fees. The panel concluded that the settlement represented a bona fide resolution of the dispute and dismissed any further claims related to the case. The decision emphasized the panel's satisfaction with the agreement's adherence to public policy principles and mandatory legal rules. The case was formally closed with the CAS endorsing the parties' resolution and issuing the consent award.