"Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes receive hope as lawyers give verdict on Max Verstappen drama"
Mercedes' hopes of overturning the outcome from the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix have been boosted after a second leading lawyer said they have legal grounds to challenge the result...
(15 December 2021)
Mercedes have been handed fresh hope in their bid to overturn the result of the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix after a second leading lawyer said they have strong legal grounds for a case.
Toto Wolff and Co were left furious following a dramatic finale, that unravelled after Williams driver Nicholas Latifi crashed into the safety barriers.
At the time Lewis Hamilton was comfortably leading the race by 11 seconds but the deployment of a safety car prompted second-placed Max Verstappen to take the gamble of pitting to put on fresh tyres.
That move appeared futile when race director Michael Masi instructed that lapped cars could not overtake the safety vehicle until it left the track, meaning there would not have been time for Verstappen to get behind his rival.
However, under pressure from Red Bull boss Christian Horner, Masi then changed his mind, allowing the cars between Hamilton and Verstappen to unlap themselves before ordering the safety car off the track, which meant the Dutchman could get on the British driver's tail before overtaking him in a one-lap shootout.
Mercedes subsequently protested Masi's decision twice, but that was dismissed by race stewards before the Silver Arrows served intent of a notice to appeal - and they have until Thursday to trigger that option.
Their potential case was backed this week by law partner Duncan Bagshaw, who told Pitpass: "The FIA, marking its own homework, perhaps unsurprisingly said that they stood by the decision of the race director Michael Masi.
“Mercedes do have a case. And I think it is quite likely they will take it to a court of arbitration because so much turns on the outcome of these races they may feel they really have no choice."
Now that view has been backed up by Nicholas Bamber, of Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP, who told racefans.net the interpretation of the FIA response to the protest was "inconsistent with a plain language view of the regulations."
He also noted Masi's actions directly contradicted a precedent the Australian set at the 2020 Eifel Grand Prix, where he argued 'all' lapped cars had to pass the safety vehicle before racing could resume.
If the matter was to end up at an International Court of Appeal hearing, Bamber believes Mercedes will have a strong argument.
“In addition to repeating the reasoning set out in the stewards’ decision, the FIA would likely argue that any ambiguity in the regulations should be resolved in favour of Masi’s decision-making made in real-time,” he said.
“Again, given the inconsistency in the application of the decision-making during the race itself, and against the same circumstances in prior races, this seems an unconvincing argument.”
Link 1: https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/lewis-hamilton-verstappen-lawyers-f1-25700005
_____________
"Mercedes have “good legal basis” for appeal over Abu Dhabi GP – lawyer"
(14th December 2021)
Mercedes would have a compelling case if they submit an appeal over the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix controversy, an expert in sports law has told RaceFans.
The team is considering whether to appeal after the stewards rejected its protest over the restart of the race on Sunday. Mercedes claimed the sport’s regulations were not followed correctly when the race was restarted at short notice, and after only five of the eight lapped cars had been allowed to un-lap themselves.
The controversy in Abu Dhabi has left the outcome of the title-deciding race of the 2021 season in doubt for two days. Lewis Hamilton lost the world championship to Max Verstappen when he was overtaken by his rival on the final lap after the restart.
Under the FIA’s rules, Mercedes have a 96-hour window to commit to submitting an appeal, around half of which has passed. Following a controversial season the team arrived in Abu Dhabi prepared for a legal wrangle, having enlisted the services of Paul Harris QC. He previously represented the team in 2013 when they appeared before an FIA tribunal over a Pirelli tyre test, and in July last year successfully represented Manchester City in a hearing of the Court of Arbitration for Sport over alleged breaches of UEFA’s club licensing and financial fair play regulations.
Nicholas Bamber, an associate in regulatory and commercial dispute resolution at Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP, believes Mercedes have good grounds to challenge the decision to reject their protest.
“Race director Michael Masi and the stewards’ interpretation of the FIA’s 2021 Sporting Regulations has been called into question by racing drivers, pundits and legal commentators alike,” he told RaceFans.
“In response to Mercedes’ protest, they concluded that article 15.3 gives the race director carte blanche to control the use of the safety car and overrides the procedure for the safety car stipulated at Article 48.12.
“This interpretation seems – on its face – to be inconsistent with a plain language view of the regulations. It also directly contradicts Michael Masi’s approach in similar circumstances at the 2020 Eifel Grand Prix where he stated ‘There is a requirement in the sporting regulations to wave all the lapped cars past’ [emphasis added] before the safety car returns to the pit lane and the race recommences ‘therefore the safety car period was a bit longer than what we would have normally wanted’ – i.e. the race director cannot overrule the appropriate application of the regulations, including the full application of article 48.12.”
This could be considered a breach of the International Sporting Code, said Bamber. “Article 1.1.1 of the 2021 FIA International Sporting Code makes clear that the regulations are to be enforced ‘based on the fundamental principles of safety and sporting fairness’ [emphasis added]. Part of sporting fairness revolves around consistency of application of the rules of the sport. As such, there appears to be a good legal basis upon which Mercedes could seek to appeal.”
If the matter was to go to an International Court of Appeal hearing, Bamber believes this apparent inconsistency could prove challenging to justify.
“In addition to repeating the reasoning set out in the stewards’ decision, the FIA would likely argue that any ambiguity in the regulations should be resolved in favour of Masi’s decision-making made in real-time, under the pressure of ensuring the race was completed safely and competitively – relying upon the sports law doctrine of respective ‘field of play’ decisions,” he said.
“Again, given the inconsistency in the application of the decision-making during the race itself, and against the same circumstances in prior races, this seems an unconvincing argument.”
As the field circulated behind the safety car at the end of the race Masi had a narrowing window of opportunity within which to organise a restart. He was also receiving communications from the two teams contesting the championship – Mercedes and Red Bull – the latter urging him to resume the race in order to give Verstappen a chance to pass Hamilton.
Bamber pointed out communication of this kind is highly unusual in professional sport. “Whilst a relatively recent move to make the FIA radio communications between teams and race director has proven popular with the F1 audience from an entertainment perspective, it has also highlighted the volume and questionable nature of communications sent mid-race by the teams,” he said.
“It is extremely unusual, if not unique, in a sporting context for team representatives to have a direct line to the officials in the middle of a contest. In sport it is extremely important for officials not to be inappropriately influenced, and this raises questions about the regulation of those communications going forward.
“In rugby we have seen a lengthy ban handed out to South Africa’s director of rugby for ‘egregious’ offences during the British and Irish Lions’ tour of South Africa, including his role in releasing a video criticising match officials’ performance. World Rugby’s independent committee found that his conduct had a ‘corrosive effect on the game more widely, as well as the viewing public and press’.”
Link 2: https://www.racefans.net/2021/12/14/mercedes-have-good-legal-basis-for-appeal-over-abu-dhabi-gp-lawyer/
_____________
"Unearthed Michael Masi quotes show Lewis Hamilton decision went against F1 chief's rules"
FIA race director Michael Masi has been in the firing line ever since Sunday's controversial finish to the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, and the scrutiny will increase after past comments came to light
(13 December 2021)
Michael Masi is a man under fire at the moment - and now past comments attributed to the Australian are set to increase the scrutiny.
FIA race director Masi was central to the storm that tainted a wild finale to the F1 season in Abu Dhabi, which saw Max Verstappen overtake Lewis Hamilton on the final lap to claim the F1 title in sensational fashion.
After controlling much of the race, Hamilton was seemingly cruising to the chequered flag when he held an 11-second lead over his Dutch rival in the latter stages, only for Williams driver Nicholas Latifi to crash and spark chaos.
A safety car was deployed, at which point Verstappen took the gamble of pitting for fresh tyres.
However, that move appeared futile when Masi, 42, instructed that lapped cars could not overtake the safety vehicle, only to then change his mind on the penultimate lap having been pressured by Christian Horner.
Critically however, it was only the five cars between Hamilton and Verstappen permitted to do so, and the Red Bull man was able to get on Hamilton's tail and on newer tyres, he duly seared past the British driver during a one-lap shootout.
Masi's actions left Mercedes furious, and led to widespread accusations that the Australian deliberately manufactured an exciting finale to benefit the spectacle.
Two subsequent protests from Toto Wolff's team were rejected, with the team then immediately signalling an intent to appeal. They will have until Thursday to do so.
And now more scrutiny is likely to fall on Masi with his decision starkly contrasting his stance taken at the Eifel Grand Prix In Germany, back in October 2020.
In that race, McLaren driver Lando Norris was left in a precarious position after a power unit issue prompted smoke and fire to come from his car, and Masi was later criticised for ordering a safety car and then allowing it to stay out for a prolonged period.
”There’s a requirement in the sporting regulations to wave all the lapped cars past,” he later told Motorsport Week.
“From that point, it was position six onwards that were still running [on the lead lap], so between 10 or 11 cars had to unlap themselves.
“Therefore the safety car period was a bit longer than what we would have normally expected.”
Had that apparent precedent been implemented on Sunday, and all lapped cars been allowed to unlap themselves, there would not have been time for the safety car to leave the track ahead of that dramatic final lap.
Masi's comments potentially leave Masi open to further criticism as the fall out from the Yas Marina rages on.
Link 3: https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/masi-f1-safety-car-hamilton-25687383
... No investigations after no bull shit... IMO the only thing clear is that Hamilton is better driver than Bottas. Same car he did 6 World championships, while Bottas nothing. Same like Vettel in the best RB era: 4 championships... since then... nothing. This proves again and again that pilot without car is almost "0"
