The case involves an appeal by FIFA against a decision by the Tribunal Nacional Disciplinario Antidopaje (TNDA) concerning Argentine footballer Damián Marcelo Musto, who tested positive for the prohibited substances Hydrochlorothiazide and Furosemide during an in-competition doping control in June 2017. The TNDA imposed a seven-month ineligibility period, which FIFA contested, leading to arbitration before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The CAS panel addressed several key legal issues, including jurisdiction, procedural fairness, and the merits of the case.
The panel confirmed that players, by holding a license, submit to FIFA's arbitration clause, which covers doping-related decisions by anti-doping organizations to which national federations delegate disciplinary powers. It clarified that FIFA has the right to appeal doping decisions directly to CAS for national-level players when no other party challenges the decision nationally, making it final within the national process. The panel also ruled that the coexistence of FIFA's anti-doping rules and national laws does not affect CAS jurisdiction, as long as an arbitration agreement exists in either set of rules.
On procedural fairness, the late provision of the Laboratory Documentation Package (LDP) to the player was deemed not to irreparably harm the case, as the legal analysis could still be performed at the appellate stage. The panel also found no breaches in the handling and storage of the player’s samples, despite delays and storage at a non-WADA-accredited facility, as the samples' integrity was confirmed.
Regarding the merits, the panel noted that sanctions for negligent anti-doping rule violations under FIFA's rules range from a reprimand to 24 months, depending on the degree of fault. The player argued that the prohibited substances entered his system through contaminated caffeine pills provided by his club, a claim supported by similar cases in Argentinian football. The panel found on a balance of probabilities that contamination was plausible, given the widespread use of such pills and the timing of other cases. While the player was negligent for not verifying the supplements, his fault was deemed "light," warranting a reduced sanction.
The panel imposed an 11-month ineligibility period, backdated to account for procedural delays not attributable to the player, which had affected his career. The sanction was set to end on 6 January 2020, with credit given for the period already served. The CAS upheld FIFA's appeal in part, setting aside the TNDA's decision but reducing the sanction based on the player's degree of fault and the circumstances of the case. The ruling highlights the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations while emphasizing procedural fairness and contextual factors in determining sanctions.