A decision in the case of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) against Joshua Lynch has been issued by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).
On 02 February 2024, Mr Joshua Lynch was notified by UKAD that he may have committed Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) for Presence of a Prohibited Substance in the urine sample taken on 14 December 2023, ibutamoren, and Use of the same Prohibited Substance. On 08 February 2024, Mr Lynch’s representative advised UKAD that he wished to have his B Sample analysed which took place on 28 February 2024. On 01 March 2024, Mr Lynch was informed by UKAD that the B Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for ibutamoren.
On 30 May 2024, UKAD formally issued Mr Lynch with a Notice of Charge for committing the ADRVs pursuant to the Anti-Doping Rules (ADR) Articles 2.1 and 2.2. The National Anti-Doping Tribunal, comprised of Jeremy Summers (Chair), Carole Billington-Wood and Dr Paul Jackson, who were appointed to determine this matter. Mr Lynch didn’t dispute the ADRVs but sought to mitigate sanction by arguing that his intentions were not intentional and sought to rely on ADR Article 10.6.2 to further reduce the period of Ineligibility imposed.
As Mr Lynch had admitted the ADRVs in relation to ADR Articles 2.1 and 2.2 due to accidental ingestion of ibutamoren. The issues before the Tribunal was to determine the source of the AAF, whether Mr Lynch acted with intention, whether there was No Significant Fault or Negligence, and the period of Ineligibility to be applied.
The Tribunal determined that Mr Lynch had established the source of the AAF, which was a single ingestion of a protein drink which contained the Prohibited Substance, which was not prepared by himself. They were also satisfied to the standard required that Mr Lynch did not act with intent. But the Tribunal found Mr Lynch had acted with a light degree of Fault.
Accordingly, the Tribunal was satisfied as Mr Lynch had admitted he had committed the ADRVs pursuant to ADR Article 2.1, and in relation to ADR Article 2.2. On the balance of probabilities, Mr Lynch had established the source of the Prohibited Substance that resulted in the AAF leading to the ADRVs and that this was not intentional as defined in ADR Article 10.2.3. The Tribunal were also satisfied Mr Lynch acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence as provided for in ADR Article 10.6.2 and he acted with a light degree of Fault and therefore imposed a period of Ineligibility of 16 months. Given that Mr Lynch had been subject to a Provisional Suspension since 02 February 2024 and there was no evidence that he had not observed the Provisional Suspension, the 16 month period of Ineligibility was set to run from 02 February 2024 and end at midnight 01 June 2025.
A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related links tab on the right-hand side.
The National Anti-Doping Panel is the United Kingdom’s independent tribunal responsible for adjudicating anti-doping disputes in sport. It is operated by Sport Resolutions and is entirely independent of UK Anti-Doping who is responsible for investigating, charging, and prosecuting cases before the NADP.
