No Renault fine, but McLaren still sweats

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Renault was found guilty of possessing McLaren data but has avoided punishment, while McLaren’s trials continue

The Formula 1 spy scandal is set to rumble on after FIA president Max Mosley scheduled another World Motor Sport Council hearing concerning McLaren for February 14.

The news came the day after the WMSC found Renault guilty of possessing confidential McLaren information but chose not to apply any penalty, as there was no evidence that it had been used to improve the performance of the R27.

The February hearing is the direct result of an in-depth investigation by the FIA into the design of McLaren’s new MP4-23. A team spent several weeks at the Woking factory, and lawyers were even called in to question engineers.

Mosley has made it clear that the report which was compiled for him by the FIA technical department indicates that the team has questions to answer about the possible use of Ferrari intellectual property.

“We very much hoped that the investigation of McLaren would be an end of the matter,” said Mosley, “but as you will have gathered it isn’t, or wasn’t. We’ve received a report that makes it necessary to have another hearing.

“We wouldn’t have another hearing and go through all this again, and bring people from all over the world, unless there was good reason.

“I should tell you that the technical department was assisted by a very big firm of international lawyers plus a team of forensic computer experts from Deloitte.”

McLaren has received a copy of the report, whose appendices detail the FIA’s causes for concern. Mosley has indicated that the team still has the opportunity to address those areas and make relevant changes before February 14.

If, however, McLaren is found guilty of using Ferrari intellectual property, the consequences could be severe. Last September the WMSC chose to punish only the team and protect the battle for the drivers’ World Championship, but this time there would be no such separation, and thus any punishment would also apply to Lewis Hamilton and his team-mate.

“If there was any negative finding about 2008, and it’s a very big if, it would apply to everybody,” said Mosley. “It would only be based on an unfair advantage, and that applies to both [team and driver], which was my view in the last case. I was wrong, as it turned out, for the championship outcome.”

In contrast, the FIA has accepted that Renault did not use any of the information taken by engineer Phil Mackereth when he moved across from McLaren in September 2006. Two days before the Monaco WMSC hearing, Charlie Whiting visited Renault’s Enstone factory to study the design processes involved in the R27, and his report played a key part in the evidence that helped to exonerate the team.

The WMSC agreed that there “was insufficient evidence to establish that the information was used in such a way as to interfere with or to have an impact on the championship”.

In the light of McLaren’s $100 million fine the lack of a penalty generated considerable criticism, although in fact the outcome mirrored that of the original McLaren hearing in July, when there was found to be no evidence that Ferrari information had been used by the team.

In addition Mosley stressed that only four drawings were deemed to have been shown to his design colleagues by Mackereth, and that the amount of information involved was considerably less than the 780 pages obtained from former Ferrari employee Nigel Stepney by Mike Coughlan at McLaren. Renault’s willingness to co-operate with the investigation also helped.

As with the original McLaren verdict, the FIA left the door open for further punishment by stating: “It should be noted that in the event of new information coming to light which calls into question the WMSC’s conclusions in this decision, this matter may be re-opened by the FIA.”

• Nigel Roebuck on the case, p32

Related articles

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore

Related products

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor invidunt ut labore et dolore