View Full Version : ? why was Spyker having redbull & Toro Rosso f1 car plans not the same as mclaren

18th February 2008, 12:34

Kolles confirms Formula 1 arbitration to continue : -

Colin Kolles has confirmed reports that, even after the buyout of Spyker by Force India, the Silverstone based team will pursue arbitration against F1 rivals Super Aguri and Toro Rosso.

In an interview with motorline.cc, the German boss said he still fervently believes that both the teams are using customer cars, which is not allowed in formula one.

Kolles initiated arbitration through the Swiss based Court of Arbitration for Sport about one year ago, and confirmed that it will now continue under the Force India banner.

He declares emphatically that Toro Rosso and Super Aguri, who it is believed source their basic chassis from the Red Bull and Honda teams respectively, are "not F1 constructors".

"Therefore we are continuing our arbitration; our objection against the customer cars," Kolles said.

He explained that more will be known about the legal challenge in about six months' time.

Kolles also agrees that, until then, Force India will effectively have to fight against close rivals that he believes are not adhering to the rules.

"But as we saw with McLaren-Mercedes last year, it is possible for a team to lose all its points in the constructors' classification, or even be excluded from the championship altogether," he said.

But Kolles refused to clarify what outcome he is specifically seeking from the arbitration.

"I only hope for justice and clarity," he said.

18th February 2008, 13:01
They didn't steal their designs! Red Bull and Honda allegedly provided them.
The FIA allowed the use of them in a stretch of Constructor rules.
Kolles legal argument is solid, and may set a precedent.
If TR, and SA were contenders for the championship the FIA would have taken action.
They took the money from the fledgling teams and expect them to eventually completely conform!

18th February 2008, 13:44
Plus it doesn't say Spyker had RB, and TR's plans! Reread the article!

18th February 2008, 15:21
the operative phrase being...

If TR and SA were contenders for the championship the FIA would have taken action.

reasons as to why Toyota wasn't being put upon by the FIA for their fiasco of getting Ferrari's design plans, and McLaren and Renault ran the gammut in both courts for their actions. While the FOA, FOM and the FIA were happy to have Toyota in their series, they knew that they were no real threat to the teams at the top of the ladder. And independent teams like Toro Rosso, Super Aguri, and even Spyker/Force India have no remote chance of breaking into the top 5, but they are needed right now to make up the numbers on the grid and keep the sponsors happy.

18th February 2008, 20:26
Plus it doesn't say Spyker had RB, and TR's plans! Reread the article!

they had that bit on a motorsports program last year about the plans (rpm or at the start of f1) in aus.

18th February 2008, 20:37
they had that bit on a motorsports program last year about the plans (rpm or at the start of f1) in aus.

"Link please!"

Valve Bounce
18th February 2008, 21:12

19th February 2008, 04:36
Ferrari International Assistance?

19th February 2008, 05:17
the forum that it was posted on moved and all post where deleted.

i did a google search

I doubt that Spyker will win the case. Stolen proof will not be admitted, and if the plans will not be admitted than how ill they prove that they are right?

a lot of pages are dead

With Red Bull already investigating possible legal action against Spyker and/or ... If the evidence turns out to be either stolen or tampered with - or both ...
www.motorsport-network.net/rss.xml - 38k

19th February 2008, 05:37
Red Bull worried about theft of designs

http://cdn5.tribalfusion.com/media/37536.gif (http://a.tribalfusion.com/h.click/a7mxY10GM01VM50cjnmqFV3FM2VF7BUPMTQTrYQcUMQdBs1Hvp T6Mu4GM0XUFZbU62w5A36P6bK2HZbrXWYDpdIv3mBW4sQdVcUj VGJeSArxWdY3TFb43bItVTUtTEvl3d3N0ZcWmE3/http://a.tribalfusion.com)
For some weeks Red Bull Racing has been looking at legal responses to the recent revelation that Spyker had acquired design documents from Milton Keynes. Spyker revealed the drawings as part of its case against Scuderia Toro Rosso, claiming that Red Bull and Toro Rosso parts are interchangeable.
Red Bull immediately launched an internal investigation in Milton Keynes and in Faenza to try to find out how these confidential documents got to Spyker. The obvious answer is that money changed hands because it is hard to understand what anyone at Red Bull had to gain from such an action. Having said that there might possibly be some disgruntled employees down in Faenza, where the design team has been decimated by the decision to design the cars in England.
There are a number of questions that arise from this: notably whether Red Bull could take legal action against Spyker, claiming that the team had received stolen goods. There is also a question of whether Spyker simply received the drawings in the mail (as is being put forward as an explanation) or whether the Silverstone team actively went in search of them. This question could probably be answered by an examination of phone and e-mail records of those involved although this would need the involvement of the police.
There is also the question of whether or not stolen documents would be admissable in the arbitration case between Spyker and Toro Rosso as many law courts refuse to accept evidence that is believed to have been acquired illegally.


19th February 2008, 06:58
I had forgotten about this little bit of chicanery.
The difference is that you’re talking about a team "acquiring" a drawing of a part
that they have no intention of using for any other reason than to support their litigation. They didn't catch Spyker with their hand in the cookie jar. Your original question is a valid one. But all it ends up being is a smoke screen. The point of contention is whether Honda and Red Bull provided customer cars. The general consensus is they did, and the FIA let them slide! Red Bull/STR did not seek legal action against Spyker, either through the sports governing body or a proper legal court. That was a bluff to try to get Kolles, and Spyker to go away.
Good research though!!

20th February 2008, 08:24
I think you would have a tough time proving any sign of Honda or Red Bull technology on the Spyker! ;)

(OK, maybe Honda, based on performance!) :)

20th February 2008, 08:42
Probably because neither Spyker nor Toro Rosso are title contenders. ;)