An Article on the Principle of Strict Liability in the Anti-Doping Sphere

Almost every time we conclude a complex anti-doping case, the same thought arises: it is time to write an article ✍️

Because the defence of athletes in anti-doping disputes rarely comes down to the simple question of whether a prohibited substance is present or not.

Behind this formulation lies much more — a multi-layered system of rules and procedures, strict standards of proof, complex medico-biochemical nuances, and a constant search for balance between the effectiveness of the fight against doping and the protection of athletes’ rights.

At Juris Ferrum Law Firm, we work with anti-doping cases involving athletes, coaches, and sports support personnel on a daily basis. But it is no less important for us to pause, reflect on our own practice, systematise accumulated experience, and bring these issues into professional discussion 💬

That is why Ganna Gnizdovska, Managing Partner of Juris Ferrum Law Firm, together with Yana Kovalova, lawyer at the firm, prepared an analytical article that was published by Yurydychna Gazeta 📰

In the article “The Principle of Strict Liability: The Foundation of the Anti-Doping System or a Source of Legal Conflicts?”, the authors analyse one of the key and, at the same time, most controversial elements of modern anti-doping regulation — the principle of strict liability.

This is neither abstract theory nor a formal retelling of legal provisions.
It is a practical view of a doctrine formed at the intersection of the World Anti-Doping Code, Ukrainian legislation, and the established jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport ⚽⚖️

Key Points of the Article 📌

• why the principle of strict liability constitutes the foundation of the entire anti-doping system and why the system could not function without it;
• how strict liability is enshrined in the World Anti-Doping Code and reflected in the Law of Ukraine “On Anti-Doping Activities in Sport”;
• the decisive role played by CAS jurisprudence in shaping and evolving this doctrine;
• where the line lies between the effectiveness of anti-doping enforcement and the protection of athletes’ rights;
• why strict liability does not mean automatic sanctions, and how modern practice increasingly moves towards individualisation;
• how procedural violations and due process considerations may significantly affect the outcome of a case;
• which CAS decisions demonstrate the gradual humanisation of anti-doping jurisprudence.

For us, such publications are not an “addition” to legal practice, but its logical continuation 🔍
They are part of our daily work — to speak about complex issues in clear language, to show how law, medicine, and sport intersect in real cases, and to explain why effective legal defence is of decisive importance in anti-doping disputes.

We sincerely thank Yurydychna Gazeta for the opportunity to publicly address complex and sensitive issues of anti-doping legislation and for creating a platform for professional discussion within the legal community 🤝

The full text of the article is available on the Yurydychna Gazeta portal.