Ferrari Formula for success goes to court

Today's Telegraph reports on the dispute that has erupted between the Ferrari and McLaren Formula One motor racing teams over alleged espionage, which has now reached the courts. Ferrari engineer Nigel Stepney has been accused of supplying McLaren's chief designer Mike Coughlan with 780 pages worth of secret technical information recorded on two computer disks. At yesterday's preliminary hearing Coughlan and his wife were ordered to pay costs following an early-morning search of their home by officials last week.

Right: without a generous helping of Ferrari's secret information, Noddy made slow progress on the Silverstone track.

Counsel for Ferrari is reported as having told Mr Justice Briggs that the Coughlans should not have had the documents which the search recovered and that their conduct might never have come to light, were it not for a tip-off from a photocopying agency. Stepney, who denies any breach of confidence, also faces a criminal investigation in Italy, where Ferrari are based. The trial continues.

The IPKat will be watching this dispute closely for further developments. Merpel says, you can watch for the weak puns, cliches and motoring metaphors too.

Incredible secret formulae here
Ferrari - the car here
Ferrari - the cartelli here
Ferrari Formula for success goes to court Ferrari Formula for success goes to court Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. Amazing the effect that using other people's confidential information can have. McLaren have clearly implemented the Ferrari secret formula for losing races in the last two GPs - France and Silverstone...


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.