Sitting on 14th September 2026 David Munro( Chair), David Scott, Richard Norbury
Case No. J2026-46
DISCIPLINARY HEARING – X( Minor)
1. X( aged 15) was summonsed to appear before the Court which was sitting as a Disciplinary Panel. He attended with his mother and his Team Manager, Jamie Ross from R Motorsport.
2. X was a competitor in the 2026 Ginetta Junior Championship and had accrued more than 12 penalty points on his Competition Licence and pursuant to NCR Ch. 2 App. 12 Art. 1.6 he had been referred to the National Court for the consideration of further penalty; his licence having been suspended until the conclusion of these proceedings.
3. The Head of Race at Motorsport UK, Cheryl Lynch, had viewed the relevant race footage which related to Ginetta Championship races at Donington, Croft and Brands Hatch and was concerned that there had been a number of cases of front to rear contact. Motorsport UK held the view that X would benefit from a program of instruction and re-education.
4. Jamie Ross was very supportive of X and believed that he was making good progress given that he was in his first season of racing cars, having graduated from a highly successful career in karting. He made the valid point that there is little opportunity for 15-year-olds to obtain on track training and testing in advance of the Ginetta Junior Championship or between official practice and qualification days. The Court had sympathy with the fact that a lack of practice was a real issue.
ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. A period of 6 hours instruction by an ARDS instructor of grade A or S should be undertaken. The instructor must provide a report to the Head of Race on satisfactory completion of the instruction.
2. X’ s competition licence is to remain suspended until 00:01 25th October, or the satisfactory completion of the six hours instruction, whichever is later.
3. That suspension will itself be suspended on the 22nd and 23rd October provided that the period of instruction has been satisfactorily completed by the 22nd of October 2026.
4. The competitor must pay the sum of £ 250 towards costs.
14th October David Munro, Chair
5. X had had the foresight to prepare notes of what he wanted to say to the Court and spoke lucidly on his own behalf. He was keenly aware of his need to improve on track. The Court takes full account of his submissions.
6. In the circumstances the Court concludes that while some further penalty was appropriate, a period of six hours instruction and education was merited.
Revolution Magazine 41