Mercedes test hearing set for June 20th

2013 F1 season

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit de Cataunya, Barcelona, 2013Mercedes will learn their fate in the FIA’s International Tribunal hearing on June 20th.

The Tribunal will examine whether Mercedes broke the rules by conducting a three-day test at the Circuit de Catalunya for Pirelli following the Spanish Grand Prix.

Red Bull and Ferrari protested Mercedes when news of the test broke during the Monaco Grand Prix weekend.

The FIA issued the following statement: “On 5th June 2013, further to protests lodged during the 2013 Monaco GP by Red Bull Racing and Ferrari Scuderia Team against cars numbers nine and ten (Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team) for having conducted with Pirelli a three day tyre testing using a 2013 car on 15th, 16th and 17th May in Barcelona, the President of the FIA, acting as the FIA Prosecuting Body, sent to the President of the International Tribunal a notification of charges against Pirelli and a notification of charges against Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team.

“On 5th June 2013, Pirelli and Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team have been convened by the President of the International Tribunal to appear before a judging panel of the International Tribunal.”

The hearing will begin at 9:30am.

Mercedes and Ferrari Pirelli tyre test row


Browse all Mercedes and Ferrari Pirelli tyre test row articles

Image ?? Daimler/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

95 comments on Mercedes test hearing set for June 20th

  1. BasCB (@bascb) said on 11th June 2013, 7:09

    Good to see all parties involved want to get this cleared as soon as reasonably possible, and not let it linger on for another month or so.

  2. GeeMac (@geemac) said on 11th June 2013, 7:16

    Someone should tell the FIA that one of the teams who lodged the complaint was “Scuderia Ferrari”, not “Ferrari Scuderia Team” which means “Ferrari Team Team”, or if you want it in Italian “Ferrari Scuderia Scuderia”.

    :p

  3. MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 11th June 2013, 14:07

    Just having a little read through of the sporting regulations in a little more detail, and I think that Mercedes’ defense that this was a Pirelli test and not a Mercedes test doesn’t necessarily absolve them of responsibility. Their justification is that a test is defined by Article 22.1 of the sporting regulations as being “undertaken by a competitor”; implying that since Pirelli are not a competitor then it is not a ‘test’ as defined by Article 22.1.

    However, there are a few interesting points on what actually defines a ‘competitor’ when referred to in the rules. Under Appendix 6 of the sporting regulations, the following definitions are made:

    4. Any reference to any competitor shall include any associate of such competitor.
    5. An “associate” means :
    a) Any person (including any corporate or unincorporated body) in which such party directly or indirectly :
    (i) Owns share capital or business assets; or
    (ii) Has the power to exercise voting rights; or
    (iii) Has the power to appoint members of the supervisory board, board of directors or bodies legally representing such a firm or body corporate or unincorporated; or
    (iv) Has the right to manage the business of such firm or body corporate or unincorporated body; or
    b) Its controller (where controller means any person who directly or indirectly has in or over any party the rights or powers listed in sub-clause (a) of the definition of associate); or
    c) Any person (including any corporate or unincorporated body) in which its controller directly or indirectly has the right or powers listed in sub-clause (a) above; or
    d) Any person (including any corporate or unincorporated body) which is set up or used by a competitor to circumvent the definition of a constructor or defeat the restrictions on being a constructor in this Appendix 6.

    I have marked in bold the relevant points, but in brief; ‘competitor’ includes any associates of a competitor, and an associate is defined, in part, as being any entity which a competitor may use to try and circumvent rules applicable only to competitors. Basically, this point in the Appendices of the sporting regulations seems specifically designed to prevent teams from doing what Mercedes are trying to do.

  4. John H (@john-h) said on 13th June 2013, 9:02

    If a team tests their 2011 car, with a 2013 spec front wing, is that legal?

    I don’t understand this 2 year rule and the ‘significantly different’ part of the regs. How can Ferrari ne exonerated without similar investigation? I’m not saying the above is what Ferrari did, but what exactly would be stopping them if its a ‘secret’ test?

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.