The case involves Luca Scassa, a motorcycle racer, and MV Agusta Motor Spa appealing against a disqualification decision by the Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme (FIM) following the Superstock FIM Cup Championship in Imola, Italy, on October 1, 2006. Scassa's motorcycle was found to have an AIM MyChron Light TGLog data-acquisition system during post-race inspection, which the FIM deemed a violation of Article 2.7.11 of its regulations. This rule prohibits adding equipment not originally on the homologated motorcycle, including data-acquisition systems. The FIM Stewards’ Panel upheld the disqualification, prompting Scassa and MV Agusta to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The CAS panel, applying Swiss law, emphasized the need for clarity and predictability in sports regulations, considering literal meaning, historical context, and logical consistency. The FIM's regulations for the Superstock category aim to keep motorcycles close to mass-produced models, allowing only minimal safety modifications. The amended Article 2.7.11, communicated in August 2006, explicitly banned additional equipment like data-acquisition systems. Scassa and MV Agusta argued the system was incomplete and non-functional, serving only as a permitted chronometer, and claimed the FIM misapplied the rule. They also alleged external pressure from a rival team influenced the decision. The FIM countered that the rule was amended to close a loophole, making it a strict-liability prohibition regardless of functionality, and noted Scassa’s mechanic had been warned before the race.
The CAS panel found the rule clear and predictably applied, ruling the presence of the AIM Mini Logger violated Article 2.7.11. However, further testimonies revealed ambiguities in enforcement. Witnesses disagreed on inspection practices, with some stating fairings were removed, making the junction box visible, while others claimed they were not. The panel found credible evidence that disconnected components were often tolerated, leading to confusion. The French and English versions of the regulation also conflicted, further muddying interpretation. The panel concluded that Scassa could have reasonably believed only fully operational systems were prohibited, not individual components like the junction box used for timing.
Ultimately, the CAS annulled the FIM’s disqualification, ruling no offense was committed due to the regulation's ambiguity and lack of clear communication. Scassa was reinstated as the Imola winner, with corresponding points and corrected rankings for the 2006 Superstock 1000cc FIM Cup. The panel recommended the FIM clarify Article 2.7.11 or issue an official explanation to prevent future disputes, highlighting the importance of transparent and consistent rule enforcement in competitive sports. The case underscores the tension between regulatory clarity and fairness, particularly in technical rules for production-based racing categories.