Comments on: Exclusive: Zoran Stefanovic explains his complaint to the EU about the FIA

By: Fred Filho

Fred Filho — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 11:20:03 +0000

Hello Stefan: WELL DONE!!!

Fred Filho

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:10:07 +0000

I analysed it at the time and only Ferrari’s was worse (even that was largely down to Midland and Red Bull also using the same engine). Cosworth had five blow-ups that season against Ferrari’s six and everyone else’s three or fewer.

By: usF1fan

usF1fan — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:36:53 +0000

I LOVE THIS CONVERSATION! F1 and James Bond, could there be anything better?

By: usF1fan

usF1fan — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:27:50 +0000

This story should have come as no surprise to anyone that follows F1. There is a history of the governing body having favorites and doing anything to try and ensure those favored teams success. Stories such as this one will be the downfall of F1. I have no doubt that the major reason for rejection of this team was because they refused to use the Cosworth engines. Does anyone think it is a coincidence that the three teams accepted for next year will be using those engines? In my opinion this is a non-story. This should have been a brief sentence or two and a link to the full statement. What will be worthy of a story is the outcome of these hearings.

By: yoss

yoss — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:41:39 +0000

i think you need to look at the stats of how many engines blew up for this manufacturer,i think you will find against all other engine manufacturers of that season their failure rate was pretty much one of the lowest and car failure was the main cause(hydraulics etc),without this you get a so called engine failure which is not related to the engine manufacture itself.
The engine was one of the most powerful and lightest powerplants available and if it was still used from 2006 would be up there with the best available today.

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:38:27 +0000

How is forcing a team to use one supplier (whose engines blew up pretty frequently when last seen in F1) rather than a wide variety of suppliers beneficial to the F1 viewer, or indeed anyone other than Max Mosley and his chosen engine supplier (I’ve left it that vague because in principle the FIA’s preferred supplier is subject to change)?

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:36:11 +0000

That’s still a choice of four engine suppliers for new teams, compared to the one engine supplier the FIA is alleged to have permitted.

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:34:39 +0000

There are two laws involved in this case, possibly three.

Competitions law requires that all companies are treated equally.

If the FIA wanted to ensure that Cosworth was the only supplier, it could have demanded a spec series and been completely within its rights. It didn’t.

It could have demanded that only engines supplied by companies that hadn’t breached Article 151c of the Sporting Regulations provide engines and then found the manufacturers plotting secession guilty of a breach of said Article. It didn’t.

The way the FIA dealt with the matter enabled established teams to use any engine they wanted provided a valid contract was in place. As a result, new teams should legally have had the same freedom of choice. If this didn’t happen, then the new teams have had a material disadvantage for a variety of reasons and competitions law has therefore been broken.

Secondly, the FIA is forbidden from being involved in commercial affairs due to a settlement with the EU in 2000. If it has been involved in rejecting entries based on supplier, that is technically a commercial decision and the FIA would have been in contempt of court.

Finally, the FIA would not have had the authority to break a contract between engine supplier and team anyway due to contract law (the FIA being a third party, and third parties being forbidden from enforcing breaches of contract). Refusing a team entry on the basis of engine supplier would have been tantamount to third-party breach of contract. This would have permitted the engine supplier and team to prosecute the FIA on the basis of contract frustration.

Oh, and by the way, the Concorde Agreement technically held until replaced, so the FIA was still bound by it even though its actions suggest it didn’t want to be.

If the FIA tries arguing the breakaway is justification for the above, it will lose the battle, largely because it will have missed the point of the case being brought in the first place.

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:26:39 +0000

Especially in the likely case that it happened after the 2010 season started!

By: Alianora La Canta

Alianora La Canta — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:26:10 +0000

The problem is quite simple – competition law requires that all companies are allowed to participate equally, unless modifications to the law are of benefit to the organisations on whom modification is imposed. Forcing new teams to use one supplier while still granting established teams a choice breaches that principle.

It’s also worth noting that the FIA is forbidden by the EU to interfere in commercial affairs, due to a legal settlement dating from 2000. Telling some teams which company to use for their engine supply and not others would not appear to be compatible with such a settlement.

The status of the other suppliers is almost completely irrelevant, especially if it turns out that one of the rejected teams was considering another source of engines (e.g. Mechachrome). If they are sufficiently committed to supplying an engine to sign a contract with a new team, then legally that contract has to be considered valid. Otherwise the FIA would be breaking a valid contract without due cause or authority.

At least I’ve heard of the person who’s designing Stefan GP’s car, and Mike Coughlan is probably better at it than Nick Wirth, who’s doing the honours at Manor. Who’s designing the Campos entry?

Manor is definitely linked to the FIA through Alan Donnelly and Nick Wirth (both of whom have worked with the FIA and its partner organisations). USF1 features the man who, until recently, was the FIA’s official press conference interviewer. Campos’ connections with the FIA are currently unknown. It is possible that Stefanovic may have a point with regard to the teams being selected all having FIA links.

Though I will admit that the “only English teams considered” theory is laughable.