Turner v British Equestrian Federation

A Sport Resolutions panel has ruled, on an appeal against a decision of the BEF, that the showjumper Lucinda Turner did not commit an offence of failing to comply with sampling requirements when she handed the horse she had just ridden to the owner to take to the control station along with the doping control officials, and he then did not allow it to be tested. Although she was the 'person responsible' under the rules for the purposes of liability for substances in the horse's system, those words did not feature in the article dealing with failure to comply with the testing requirements and the words of the rules did not place a responsibility on her for the actions of others in this context. Although if she had herself refused or failed to comply she would have committed the offence, she had not done so. It was the owner who had done so.  The panel also decided in the alternative that even if she had technically committed an offence she had shown no fault or negligence, and that it would in any event have eliminated the showjumper's ban on that basis.

The concept of person responsible is the subject of further challenge in an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in a different case against an FEI decision that a rider bore responsibility for a substance in a horse's system although he had simply ridden it and had not owned it or been responsible for its upkeep.  That appeal is due to be heard in the Autumn.

The full decision can be read in the attached pdf.

Adam Lewis QC instructed by Wright Hassal acted for Miss Turner.