McLaren’s Hamilton Spa appeal ruled inadmissible

[abbY]

The FIA’s International Court of Appeal has thrown out McLaren’s case against Lewis Hamilton’s recent Belgian Grand Prix penalty on the grounds that their appeal was inadmissible.

Hamilton had 25 seconds added to his Spa race time for gaining an advantage by cutting a chicane whilst fighting Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen for the lead. This was given in place of a drive-through penalty, as the incident occurred late in the race, and drive-throughs are not susceptible to appeal under the International Sporting Code.

McLaren had appealed the stewards' decision, which saw Hamilton drop from first to third in the Belgian results, on the grounds that their driver had relinquished the lead back to Raikkonen immediately following the incident in order to negate any advantage. They also cited the fact that on two occasions race control had told the team that Hamilton’s conduct appeared to be within the rules.

However, the Court rejected McLaren’s right to appeal, citing Paragraph 5 of Article 152 of the International Sporting Code, which states: “Penalties of driving through or stopping in pit lanes together with certain penalties specified in FIA Championship regulations where this is expressly stated, are not susceptible to appeal.â€

The Court's decision means Hamilton’s championship lead remains at just a single point over Ferrari’s Felipe Massa, who inherited the victory at Spa.

The International Court of Appeal's decision in full:
At the Grand Prix of Belgium, run on 7 September 2008, and counting towards the 2008 FIA Formula One World Championship, the Stewards of the meeting imposed a drive-through penalty upon the driver of car No. 22, Lewis Hamilton, for a breach of Article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and Appendix L, Chapter 4, Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code.

As the drive-through penalty was imposed at the end of the race, 25 seconds were added to the driver’s elapsed race time in accordance with Article 16.3 of the FIA 2008 Formula One Sporting Regulations.

Article 152 of the International Sporting Code states that drive-through penalties are “not susceptible to appealâ€.

The competitor Vodafone McLaren Mercedes appealed the Steward’s decision before the International Court of Appeal in a hearing in Paris on September 22nd.

Having heard the explanations of the parties the Court has concluded that the appeal is inadmissible.

The International Court of Appeal was presided over by Mr Philippe NARMINO (Monaco), elected President, and composed of Mr Xavier CONESA (Spain), Mr Harry DUIJM (Netherlands), Mr Thierry JULLIARD (Switzerland) and Mr Erich SEDELMAYER (Austria).

Link->The Official Formula 1 Website

 

[F-0ccY]

Yeah, not surprising since they clarified during Monza that you aren't allow to overtake till the next corner.

 

[vb86]

he deserved it.. rather than braking furthur (which he was in a position to do so), he chose to cut the chicane. had he braked, he would have lost a lot of ground. but by cutting the chicane, he was in an excellent position to overtake kimi. had there been a concrete wall there instead of a chicane, lewis wouldnt have even attempted that move.

 

[abbY]

had there been a concrete wall there instead of a chicane, lewis wouldnt have even attempted that move.

If's and but's hold no value ....hamilton can argue the same ..if kimi had not blocked him ...he could have gone through without having to use the gravel trap.

This is bad for F1 ....even if Kimi had benefited from the penalty ...I might consider ..but the thing is the benefit goes to Massa who's performance was lackluster@ SPA.

BTW nobody argued on legality of Lewis's move ... the judgement was based on the fact that a drive through penalty cannot be appealed.

And more importantly ... its a known fact that the FIA is biased to ferrari...here is an excerpt

The disputed truthfulness and accuracy of an email sent by the FIA's legal department last Friday to everyone involved in McLaren's appeal hearing in Paris has once again raised fresh questions about the organisation's credibility and integrity.

The correspondence claimed that Tony Scott Andrews, a man held in high regard in F1 circles, admitted to making "an inadvertent error" while he was chief steward at the 2007 Japanese Grand Prix.

Scott Andrews, it was claimed, conceded that he wrongly imposed a time penalty on Italian driver Tonio Liuzzi for overtaking Adrian Sutil under yellow flags and Toro Rosso were allowed to appeal. The FIA email added that Scott Andrews had confirmed this in a phone conversation with F1 Race Director Charlie Whiting.

Were this to have been the case then the FIA would have been in a stronger position to rule the McLaren appeal against the stop-and-go penalty Lewis Hamilton suffered in Belgium as inadmissible. According to McLaren, the fact that Toro Rosso were granted the right to appeal means a precedent has been set that enables them to dispute the stewards' judgement in Spa.

"Having checked with the permanent chief of stewards who signed the Decision in Japan, we wish to inform you that there is an error on the face of the Decision document," the FIA told McLaren. The precedent would not hold, the mail declared, because Liuzzi's punishment was meted out under a different article of the rules.

It is a telling insight into McLaren's faith in the integrity of the governing body that, having received the email on Friday, they then sent a delegation of team officials to travel to Brands-Hatch on Sunday, where Scott Andrews was overseeing a race event, to check the truthfulness of the FIA's claim. His reaction to being informed of the FIA email is reported to have been one of 'outrage'.

Scott Andrews told the court in Paris: "I have seen the email and I'm extremely surprised by its content. In short, it is grossly inaccurate and misleading."

He continued by stating that Whiting had never asked him if he had made an error in Japan and added: "Had he done so, the answer would have been 'no'."

In his closing speech, McLaren's lawyer Mark Phillips QC called the email an "unfortunate exchange" and added: "I ask you to reflect on that when you come to consider the way in which certain members of the FIA conducted themselves. I won't say any more than that."

Link->Email raises concerns about FIA's integrity - Planet-F1 News - from planet-f1.com

 

[saumilsingh]

Anytime you have more than 2 wheels outside the white lines and your foot on the throttle at the same time, it's a drive-thru penalty. And drive-thru's can't be appealed.
It's pretty watertight.

 

[Wraith]

Originally Posted by vb86
had there been a concrete wall there instead of a chicane, lewis wouldnt have even attempted that move.

If's and but's hold no value ....hamilton can argue the same ..if kimi had not blocked him ...he could have gone through without having to use the gravel trap.

This is bad for F1 ....even if Kimi had benefited from the penalty ...I might consider ..but the thing is the benefit goes to Massa who's performance was lackluster@ SPA.

BTW nobody argued on legality of Lewis's move ... the judgement was based on the fact that a drive through penalty cannot be appealed.

And more importantly ... its a known fact that the FIA is biased to ferrari...here is an excerpt

Looks like Lewis isnt making any friends....

"Lewis would probably never have had a crack at Kimi around the outside at the first part of the Bus Stop without knowing he had the option of going onto the asphalt part," Webber, 31, said.

F1 : More chicane talks to take place - Webber - WEBBER - F1-Live.com

"He is great but he needs to take a little bit of stock now and again and bring a little bit of humility to his form," Jordan added.

F1 : Jordan discounts anti-Hamilton conspiracy - EDDIE_JORDAN - F1-Live.com

 

[leomax]

If's and but's hold no value ....hamilton can argue the same ..if kimi had not blocked him ...he could have gone through without having to use the gravel trap.

allright

 

[Ck Nish]

Well, that wasn't surprising considering all the shit that's been happening. Whatever, man. I'm just stoked for this weekend's race.

 

[montylee]

woot!!! first ever night race!!!

 

[saumilsingh]

Please, please, noone start a thread with spoilers in the title once the race is over.
Many people don't get Star Sports and they really don't need the first ever night-race to be spoiled for them.

 

[Ck Nish]

Haha! Okay. I'm starting a thread right now for the GP.