UKAD v Anthony De Luca


A decision in the matter of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Anthony De Luca has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).

On 26 September 2021, Mr Anthony De Luca, a Professional ice hockey player, provided a urine Sample In-Competition. The Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for carboxy-THC, a metabolite of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound found in cannabis.

Mr De Luca was subsequently charged on 21 December 2021, with a breach of ADR Articles 2.1 for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in his Sample, and ​2.2 for Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method. Mr De Luca admitted the Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV) in relation to ADR Article 2.1 but denied the ADRV pursuant to Article 2.2, as he asserted that the AAF resulted from his Out-of-Competition Use of cannabis , and therefore he should receive a reduced period of Ineligibility pursuant to ADR Article 10.2.4. The NADP Tribunal, consisting of Charles Hollander QC ​(Chair), Colin Murdock and Professor Brian Lunn found Mr De Luca had committed the ADRV in relation to ADR Articles 2.1 but ADR Article 2.2 was not proven. A period of Ineligibility of three months was imposed which commenced on 21 June 2022.

A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related documents tab on the right-hand side.

The National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) 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.

The original press release can be found here :

Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.


Legal Advisors

Copyright © LawInSport Limited 2010 - 2022. These pages contain general information only. Nothing in these pages constitutes legal advice. You should consult a suitably qualified lawyer on any specific legal problem or matter. The information provided here was accurate as of the day it was posted; however, the law may have changed since that date. This information is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a substitute for taking legal advice in any specific situation. LawInSport is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this information. Please refer to the full terms and conditions on our website.