The case before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ad hoc Division involved a dispute between the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) and the Fédération Internationale de Bobsleigh et de Tobogganing (FIBT) concerning the eligibility of the Brazilian 4-man bobsleigh team for the 2006 Winter Olympics. The AOC sought to disqualify the Brazilian team due to a doping violation by one of its members, Armando Dos Santos, who tested positive for nandrolone in an out-of-competition test conducted by the Brazilian Olympic Committee (BOC) on January 4, 2006. The AOC argued that under FIBT regulations, the disqualification of Dos Santos should extend to the entire team, thereby allowing the Australian team, as the third-place finisher in the qualifying event, to replace them.
The FIBT opposed the AOC's request, stating that the positive test result did not yet constitute a confirmed anti-doping rule violation, as the required procedural steps, such as testing the B sample and holding a hearing, had not been completed. The FIBT also emphasized that the test was conducted out-of-competition, meaning the disqualification provisions in its regulations, which apply only to in-competition tests, were not relevant. Additionally, the FIBT noted that even if the Brazilian team were disqualified, there was no rule allowing another team to automatically take their place. The BOC supported the FIBT's position, highlighting the lack of a formal sanction against Dos Santos and the procedural deficiencies in the AOC's application, including the absence of a copy of the challenged decision as required by CAS rules.
The CAS panel, composed of arbitrators from the USA, Switzerland, and Italy, heard the case on February 19, 2006. The panel confirmed its jurisdiction and applied the relevant regulations, including the FIBT Doping Control Regulations and general principles of law. It ruled in favor of the FIBT, concluding that the adverse analytical finding for Dos Santos did not yet amount to a confirmed anti-doping rule violation and that the out-of-competition nature of the test meant the disqualification provisions did not apply. The panel also noted that the BOC's premature public disclosure of the adverse finding violated FIBT rules.
Ultimately, the Brazilian team remained eligible, and the Australian team's request was denied. The decision underscored the importance of due process in anti-doping cases, distinguishing between an adverse analytical finding and a confirmed violation, and highlighted the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements before imposing sanctions. The ruling reinforced the legal framework governing doping disputes in international sports.