by Jeremy Clare
USADA is seeking the disqualification of all of Mr. Lance Armstrong’s competitive results from August 1, 1998 onward. According to Article 17 of the World Anti-Doping Code, the statute of limitations for an action brought against an athlete is eight years from the date that the alleged violation(s) occurred. However, USADA claimed that the statute of limitations was suspended because Mr. Armstrong concealed the violations.
In its Reasoned Decision, USADA cited one Court of Arbitration for Sport decision, one United States Court of Appeals, Eight Circuit decision, and one American Arbitration Association decision in support of its claim that the statute of limitations was suspended because Mr. Armstrong concealed the violations. USADA further stated that it is a “well-established principle” that the statute of limitations is suspended if the person seeking to assert it as a defense has “subverted the judicial process.” Finally, USADA noted that Mr. Armstrong could have challenged USADA’s assertion that the statute of limitations was suspended after he received notice of USADA’s allegations in the initial charging letter, but Mr. Armstrong failed to make any such challenge.
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | Evidence against Armstrong, Disputing, October 19, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | Standard of Proof and Means of Proof, Disputing, October 17, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | Charges Brought against Armstrong, Disputing, October 16, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Issues its Reasoned Opinion Describing its Evidence against Lance Armstrong, Disputing, October 15, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | Remaining Procedural Steps, Disputing, August 29, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Announces Lance Armstrong’s Lifetime Ban from Sport and Forfeiture of Titles, Disputing, August 24, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Austin Federal Court Dismisses Lance Armstrong Lawsuit Against USADA, Disputing, August 20, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Federal Court to Rule Before August 23, Disputing, August 10, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Hearing is Today, Disputing, August 10, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Lance Armstrong Responds to USADA’s Motion to Dismiss, Disputing, August 8, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Fairness of Arbitration Procedure, Disputing, August 8, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Jurisdiction, Disputing, August 7, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Existence of Agreement to Arbitrate, Disputing, August 6, 2012
- The International Convention Against Doping in Sport of 2005, Disputing, August 2, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA’s Successful Arbitration Track Record, Disputing, August 1, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part VI | Right to Appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Disputing, July 30, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part V |USADA Expedited Track, Disputing, July 26, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part IV | The Arbitration Hearing, Disputing, July 25, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part III | The Appointment of Arbitrators, Disputing, July 24, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part II | The Review Board Track, Disputing, July 23, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | USADA Files Motion to Dismiss Lance Armstrong’s Suit , Disputing, July 21, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part I | USADA ‘Results Management,’ Disputing, July 19, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Texas Federal Court Will Hear Lance Armstrong Case on August 10, Disputing, July 18, 2012
- Armstrong v. Tygart | Lance Armstrong’s Suit and Restraining Order against USADA, Disputing, July 17, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | What is the USADA? Disputing, July 16, 2012
- USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Allegations, Disputing, July 13, 2012
- Lance Armstrong | The Doping Controversy Continues, Disputing, July 12, 2012
Jeremy Clare is a law clerk at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert. Jeremy received his J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 2012 and received a B.A. from the University of South Carolina where he studied political science.