Motorsport’s governing body, the FIA, said it is no longer looking into an alleged conflict of interest within Formula One between Mercedes chief Toto Wolff and F1 Academy series head Susie Wolff.
In reference to the married couple, the FIA stated on Thursday that F1’s “compliance management system is robust enough to prevent any unauthorized disclosure of confidential information.”
It added that there is no longer an active investigation into “terms of ethical or disciplinary inquiries involving any individual.”
Prior to that, every F1 team, bar Mercedes, had issued a joint statement saying that they hadn’t made any complaint to the FIA regarding the conflict of interest allegations.
“We are pleased and proud to support F1 Academy and its managing director through our commitment to sponsor an entrant in our liveries from next season,” the statement said.
According to Business F1 magazine, some unnamed F1 team principals had previously alleged that Mercedes boss Wolff “now has access to confidential information that they do not, via his wife, which is not being shared with them and Wolff is using to his own benefit.”
In a statement on social media Friday, Susie Wolff said that nobody from the FIA had spoken to her directly about the conflict of interest allegations between her and her husband.
“This episode has so far taken place without transparency or accountability,” she said. “I have received online abuse about my work and my family. I will not allow myself to be intimidated and intend to follow up until I have found out who has instigated this campaign and misled the media.
“What happened this week is simply not good enough. As a sport, we must demand, and we deserve, better.”
In a statement shared by Mercedes on Friday, Toto Wolff said that he and the team are in “active legal exchange with the FIA,” adding: “We await full transparency about what took place and why, and have expressly reserved all legal rights.”
Earlier this week, Mercedes “wholly reject[ed]” the conflict of interest allegations, which it said “wrongly impinges on the integrity and compliance of our Team Principal.”
