82 replies to this topic

[jcbc3]

I'll just add that if FIA finds that Caterham is to be thrown out of the championships in the affected year I don't have a problem with that either, since I am equally sure that FIA knows and applies its own sporting laws.

[dau]

Force India faces the (untrained) eye of the storm

Subscribers only
Very interesting reading

Can't read the article, but i don't see why the judge has to "understand F1".

[Atreiu]

It's goes on to mention significant financial implications for Lotus/Caterham HRT and Virgin/Marussia that can possibly carry on from the court to F1 based on the current Concorde Agreement, and other things.

[packapoo]

Move on, guys, especially FI, it is kind of annoying that there are so much noise about the team just finished at the back of the pack by the team that are falling.

No, no. Squeaky wheel syndrome....

This has been a most illuminating thread.
Especially liked Felix's offering which hinted that Vijay may allegedly pay.... One day.... Sometime... Maybe....
Unbelievable..

[wrighty]

It seems Rencken is as blinkered as the rest of the F1 community. I am pretty certain that the judge know the law and applied it in a correct manner. Rencken implies that he didn't.

Ah but that's a very 'F1' thing though isn't it......'yes Mr. Judge you might think you know how the law works, but here in F1 you're supposed to reach this decision because of these factors that you thought were not important but to us are absolutely CRUCIAL!!!' (like expecting a supplier to protect your data like it belongs to you despite the fact that you don't pay your bill).

.....and yes it does make the Spygate adjudication of $100million look frankly ridiculous now doesn't it.....

[hippie]

Force India faces the (untrained) eye of the storm

Subscribers only
Very interesting reading

I find that the Autosport article is one-sided, because it cherry-picks pieces of information that support Force India's claims while it ignores some other pieces of information that are unfavourable for Force India.

The Autosport article fails to mention that in High Court Force India accused Aerolab, Gascoyne and the Caterham/Lotus F1 team of systematic copying of Force India's whole aerodynamic platform and other key parts of its car, but the judge found no indication of such large-scale copying. The only actual misuse of copyright happened when Caterham/Lotus's subcontractor Aerolab/FondTech designed the initial wind tunnel model for Lotus Racing's 2010 car, the T127.

A more balanced article would have mentioned that a major part of Force India's accusations were rejected by the judge, and that only Caterham/Lotus's subcontractor was found liable for breach of confidence. That Caterham was found not liable for breach of confidence may turn out to be very significant if the FIA has to consider whether Caterham has participated in any "fraudulent conduct" or "prejudicial act", which are forbidden in the article 151c of the International Sporting Code.

There are also other instances in the article where Dieter Rencken views things exclusively from Force India's point of view while ignoring other possible viewpoints. For instance, he mentions that the 2009 Force India car VJM-02 set the fastest lap at Monza, but he fails to mention that the car was a dog for most of the season. I also find it difficult to understand how Force India could possibly think that the three small parts with their copyright that found their way into the Lotus Racing's 2010 car (the vortex generator, rear brake duct lower element and rear view mirror) could give the car any significant aerodynamic advantage when these parts are used inside a different overall aerodynamic design than the VJM-02 had.

When Rencken considers the potential punishments that Caterham may be handed if it is found to have infringed the Concorde Agreement and/or the International Sporting Code, he seems to paint the worst-case scenario for Caterham. But I think it's equally possible that Caterham will escape any penalty, if the FIA considers that Caterham cannot be held responsible for its subcontractor's breach of copyright.

Rencken also suggests that if the FIA fails to punish Caterham, this sends out a message that incorporating illegally-gained information is permitted in F1. But I think an equally dangerous precedent could be set if the FIA decides that F1 teams can be held responsible for breaches that their subcontractors have committed. Then the only sure way to avoid such breaches would be if the F1 teams stopped using subcontractors altogether, but I don't think that's a feasible option.

[jals99]

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/75041.html
HRT asks FIA to probe Caterham

[jcbc3]

Question: When Crashgate was in full swing it was said that championship positions were 'frozen' at a set date (sometime in late November/early December), so Renault couldn't retrospectively be stripped of their positions and Alonso of his ill gotten win. How is this different? I mean cheating is cheating is cheating.

[jals99]

Question: When Crashgate was in full swing it was said that championship positions were 'frozen' at a set date (sometime in late November/early December), so Renault couldn't retrospectively be stripped of their positions and Alonso of his ill gotten win. How is this different? I mean cheating is cheating is cheating.

It was said, that FIA cant change results of races from past years, but it can still through the team out of Constructors Championship and refuse it from prise money

[jcbc3]

Then you have to wonder how Renault stayed in their position in the WCC.

[D.M.N.]

http://joesaward.wor.../everyone-wins/

After the decision Force India continued to try to stir up trouble, arguing that the FIA should be involved. The federation has shown no obvious interest in the case.

At the costs hearing, the judge dismissed the Force India claim that costs should be awarded against the defendants, noting that no damages were ever claimed, let alone awarded, on the particular question that Aerolab was found guilty of.

Gascoyne was awarded an interim payment of costs of £400,000, pending a full assessment of the fees involved, while 1 Malaysia Racing Team was awarded a similar interim payment of £250,000. This means that in the next 14 days Force India will have to pay £650,000. It will then also have to settle its own legal fees.

In the overall scheme of things, one must judge for oneself whether winning £20,000 was worth in excess of £1 million in legal fees.

Ouch for Force India.

[Cavani]

oops but wtf ? isn't caterham supposed to be accused of cheating ? why force india should pay now ?

[lokiman]

http://joesaward.wor.../everyone-wins/



Ouch for Force India.

Ouch, indeed. The fact that the judge awarded costs on a full indemnity basis speaks volumes, too. The judge must have taken rather a dim view of Force India's conduct.

[lokiman]

oops but wtf ? isn't caterham supposed to be accused of cheating ? why force india should pay now ?

Because Force India only won on one very minor aspect of its case. If you go to court, for instance, alleging 10 different things and 9 of those allegations are rejected, you're very likely to have to pay the bulk of the other side's costs.

[Saturnus]

And to make this even worse, Aerolab tried to settle this with Force India outside of court.
They could have gotten more money and nearly no expenses, but Mallaya let greed get in the way of common sense.

[Fastcake]

oops but wtf ? isn't caterham supposed to be accused of cheating ? why force india should pay now ?

That's outside the remit of the High Court, the court case is purely about intellectual property and missed payments. Any cheating allegations are to do with the FIA.

[D.M.N.]

MikeGascoyne: https://twitter.com/#!/MikeGascoyne
Don't understand FI statement that the interim costs are covered by payments into court, it's just not true, only 110k covered, why lie
1:48 PM - 5 May 12 via web

[King Six]

Why aren't the FIA showing interest in this case? They were more than happy to dock McLaren vs Ferrari. Shame on the FIA

[Ross Stonefeld]

Well it's not an exact copy, for a start.

[BRG]

Why aren't the FIA showing interest in this case? They were more than happy to dock McLaren vs Ferrari. Shame on the FIA

a) it's not McLaren and Ferrari
b) it's not Max Mosley

[Anders Torp]

http://joesaward.wor.../everyone-wins/



Ouch for Force India.

Saward is a Caterham director.

[D.M.N.]

Saward is a Caterham director.

That does not make a difference in this context at all. Saward has stated the facts in this case, which is that Force India have got to pay some costs.

[Saturnus]

Why aren't the FIA showing interest in this case? They were more than happy to dock McLaren vs Ferrari. Shame on the FIA

Maybe because Aerolab is not a Formula 1 team?
Caterham and Gascoyne was cleared of all charges, so there's nothing to find there.

Force India is just trying to put focus on something else than the fact that they don't pay their bills.

[Anders Torp]

That does not make a difference in this context at all. Saward has stated the facts in this case, which is that Force India have got to pay some costs.

It is a fact and he is writing about a case involving a Caterham Group company.

[D.M.N.]

It is a fact and he is writing about a case involving a Caterham Group company.

Yes, but the context of the story does not change. It has not only been reported by Saward but also other publications such as Autosport and BBC.

[D.M.N.]

https://twitter.com/#!/MikeGascoyne/sta...578157595508737

MikeGascoyne
Dead line for payment for Force India passed and nothing received, not unexpected though, typical of Bob Fearnley, all talk...
9:09 PM - 18 May 12

[One]

So there comes another case.

[jcbc3]

Too bad cheapracer isnt around to chide you D.M.N. (refer to post 20 in this thread)

[packapoo]

https://twitter.com/#!/MikeGascoyne/sta...578157595508737

MikeGascoyne
Dead line for payment for Force India passed and nothing received, not unexpected though, typical of Bob Fearnley, all talk...
9:09 PM - 18 May 12

Always seemed to me that Gascoyne was full of it and eager to spread his knowledge. Bit rich him fingering Fearnley.
Hoped his sideways hike would shut him up; too bad seems not.

[Vickyy]

Always seemed to me that Gascoyne was full of it and eager to spread his knowledge. Bit rich him fingering Fearnley.
Hoped his sideways hike would shut him up; too bad seems not.

Quite ironical, who is referring to "all talk"

[D.M.N.]

Back to court: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/104317

[dau]

FI really need that money now i guess.

[dau]

And it seems to be over, finally. Force India's appeal has been rejected and the last decision stands. They'll now have to pay €820,000 to Aerolab plus their own legal fees. Guess they can't drag it out any further.

http://joesaward.wor...the-high-court/