Regulatory Framework of Formula-I
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF FORMULA-I?
Formula-I has been the pinnacle of world racing, with competitors and teams pushing the envelopes of science and technology to outperform one another. However, in the recent past, the sport has expanded its reach and has attained an all-time high attendance during the Grand Prix weekends. This is courtesy of the efforts of the new management who pushed for Formula-I to modernize its approach, enter into new markets, draw in a younger audience, and increase its social media presence to generate more attendance during Grand Prix weekends and thereby increase revenue. Liberty Media Corporation had acquired the motorsport series from Bernie Ecclestone, who had ruled it with an iron grip for almost 40 years. Formula 1 added Miami to its racing calendar this season and plans to return to Las Vegas after 41 years in the upcoming one, with the city's iconic strip forming part of the track.?
The Regulations being codified gives it some solidarity, in an otherwise dynamic environment where decisions are made in split seconds with a huge scope of interpretation and grey areas in the application of rules. It is thus critical both for the casual viewer and the enthusiast to comprehend and understand the framework and processes that has given life to the spectacle and also understand/ascertain how such rules are applied in a sport to protect the sanctity and safeguard promote fair competition within the sport.
?Accordingly, this article will examine the following positions:
1.??What is the current Formula One regulatory framework?
2.??The process of challenging the FIA decisions
3.??Adjudication of Disputes in the Future
?
What is the Formula One regulatory framework?
The International Sporting Code (ISC),?is the principal law which applies to all motorsports and?serves as a guiding force for the rules laid forth. The code extends?to all?motorsports events?that are supervised by the FIA and ASNs (National Motorsport Body). The Sporting, Technical and Financial Regulations are primarily based on?the principles enunciated?under the International Sporting Code.
The FIA (Federation Internationale de l'Automobile) is the governing body of Motorsports including Formula 1 and is responsible for enforcing the rules and regulations connected with the Sport. In case any team inherently fails to adhere to the set of regulations then the FIA Courts and race Stewards may impose sanctions on the Formula I teams and drivers who breach them. The penalties imposed for a breach can include a warning, reprimand, fine and various other measures affecting the drivers in the race such as drop-in grid position, starting the race from the pit lane etc.[1]
?Formula I is governed by a series of?regulations?which are approved by the FIA General Assembly, which is comprised of the FIA members – i.e. National Automobile Clubs or National Automobile Associations.?These regulations include:
?Additionally, Formula I also has
?The?FIA Statutes and Internal Regulations[5]?which governs how the FIA works on an organisational level and more importantly establishes jurisdiction of the International Tribunal and the International Court of Arbitration over disputes arising from the application of the FIA rules.?
Aside from the established rules and regulations above, there are also track-specific rules which can change race by race, and the Formula I teams are given a pre-race briefing on those by the marshals and the Race Director. These changes may be with respect to track limits, tyre allocations etc.
There are also, Judicial and Disciplinary Rules[6]?and?Practice Directions[7]?which contain provisions governing the procedure relating to disputes (for example, disputes between teams, or between the teams and the FIA for stewards’ decisions etc) and the JDR contains the rules related to the FIA Courts – the FIA International Tribunal (IT) and the FIA International Court of Appeal (ICA) (collectively referred to as the “FIA Courts”).
The Practice Directions do not, however, have regulatory power and merely serve as guidance to the parties in the proceedings before the FIA Courts. In addition to the aforesaid rules and regulations, the FIA have their own?statutes?which govern the mechanics of the working of the FIA and lays down its functions and powers.?
The?International Court of Appeal[8]?(ICA) is the body that deals with the final appeals with respect to disputes in motorsports. Most of the decisions taken within the framework of the FIA competitions, such as decisions by the stewards and the IT can be appealed to the ICA, with the judges being elected by the FIA General Assembly.[9]?Unlike some other sports, the appellate court for decisions related to Formula I is not the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), but the ICA. It is noteworthy that the decisions of the ICA can be further appealed before the French National Courts.
Challenging FIA Decisions
?Competitors have 3 different ways of challenging FIA decisions. The available methods differ depending on the circumstances. The methods are:
Lodging an Appeal
?The FIA International Tribunal is vested with the responsibility of adjudicating disputes arising out of infringements of any of the FIA Statutes, the FIA regulations, and the Code and the Code of Ethics[10].
The Cost Cap Adjudication Panel is vested with the responsibility of overseeing compliance with the Financial Regulations[11]?in place. Appeals both from the International Tribunal and the Cost Cap Adjudication Panel flows onto the ICA.
However, issues pertaining to?doping in sports are dealt with by the FIA Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee or directly by the Court of Arbitration for Sports with the consent of all parties[12]
The ICA deals with the appeals from the IT and the Cost Cap Adjudication Panel, which has the responsibility of overseeing compliance with the Financial Regulations.?Additionally, the decisions of stewards taken in connection with a race can be appealed to the ICA.[13]?
?The Code lays down that the stewards' decisions to impose penalties are legally binding unless an intention to appeal is expressed within the statutory deadline. This in essence?means that the previously imposed penalty is suspended until the appeal is heard, but the suspension means that a Formula I driver/team will not be able to participate in the podium ceremony or appear in the final classification other than in the place that would have resulted from the penalty's application.
However, in some cases, even if an appeal is filed, stewarding judgments become instantly binding and final in nature. These conditions are outlined in Article 12.3.3.b of the Code:
The Formula I teams are also barred from appealing certain decisions, such as drive-through penalties, stop-and-go penalties, and other penalties that may be listed in the Formula I Sporting Regulations, such as time penalties, grid position drops, rules regarding the start and restart of a race, and penalty points on a driver's Super Licence.[14]
?Filing a protest
Article 13.2.1 of the Code outlines circumstances in which one has the right to protest, such as when Competitors believe there has been an error, irregularity, or infraction of the regulations, or when they disagree with the classification established at the end of the competition.[15]
An?instance of Formula I teams utilising their right to protest is the case of the "pink Mercedes," although this time the stewards' decision was appealed all the way to the ICA (it was, however, later withdrawn). Renault DP World Formula I Team (Renault) filed protests (later joined by other Formula I teams) during the 2020 FIA Formula One World Championship regarding the front and rear brake ducts used by the two BWT Racing Point cars during the Styrian Grand Prix 2020, the Hungarian Grand Prix 2020, and the British Grand Prix 2020. Renault claimed that the Racing Point's brake ducts were based on and virtually identical to those used in Mercedes?in 2019. As a result, Renault contended?that Racing Point infringed Appendix 6 of the 2020 Formula I Sporting Regulations as the?brake ducts are defined as a "listed part" in Appendix 6 and thus must be designed by a team or, if outsourced, cannot be designed by a competitor in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 (a) and 2 (c) of Appendix 6 of the 2020 Sporting Regulations.[16]
领英推荐
?The stewards opted to penalise Racing Point, inflict a 15-point punishment, and give reprimands after reviewing all of the materials at their disposal and hearing from the technical experts and Mercedes as witnesses. Renault, Ferrari, and Racing Point themselves submitted appeals to the ICA under their right to appeal under Article 15 of the International Sporting Code 2020 and Article 10.1.1 of the Judicial and Disciplinary Rules. The teams, later on,?withdrew all of the appeals conceding to the decision rendered.
?Right to review
Article 14 of the Code states that “Competitions forming part of an FIA Championship, cup, trophy, challenge or series, or of an international series, a significant and relevant new element is discovered which was unavailable to the parties seeking the review at the time of the decision concerned, the stewards who have given a ruling or, failing this, those designated by the FIA, may decide to re-examine their decision”.[17] The right to review can be exercised through a petition from the parties concerned or the party directly affected. The stewards have the sole discretion when determining whether new elements indeed exist, and that decision is not subject to an appeal to the ICA.
?In the 2021 season, Red Bull submitted a?right-to-review motion?for the?events that transpired?at Silverstone, where Lewis Hamilton was handed a 10-second penalty for colliding with Max Verstappen, resulting in Verstappen failing to complete the race, and Hamilton overcoming?the penalty to win the race. Red Bull used their?then-reserve driver, Alex Albon to?duplicate Hamilton's racing lines and submitted?that as the 'new element' (amongst others) to argue that Hamilton would not have made the bend and the penalty should have been steeper. The stewards refused the application because it did not qualify as a "significant and relevant new element."[18]
?
Future of Formula I Disputes
Following the Abu Dhabi events, the FIA announced some?key changes?to the administration of the races for the 2022 season.?Those include:
?The Formula I teams and drivers welcomed the new developments as the Race Director would be able to make more precise judgements and eliminate possible disagreements.
?The Virtual Race Control Room intends to help the Race Director in the application of Sporting Regulations by utilising cutting-edge technology technologies. However, deploying such technology is unlikely to eradicate any disagreements between Formula I teams and the Race Director's interpretation of the regulations, although the accuracy of the choices made is expected to improve.
There is an inherent need to have a mechanism of private dispute resolution mechanism in Formula 1 as there is always a risk of leakage of confidential information through the course of legal proceedings, especially in technical appeals which may result in the leakage of invaluable private intellectual property. This is why most hearings are held under embargoes. Even the controversy of the Fuel Flow Meter which plagued the Ferrari Team during 2019 was settled in private in consideration of the same.[20]?
Although there is an agreement that motorsport as an industry can take further steps to improve accessibility and transparency, the principle behind having a private method of dispute resolution specific to motorsport stems from the fact that the regulations are part of private law which are managed and enforced internally and hence require internal structures.
With the advent of Blockchain technology and decentralized applications, disputes may be arbitrated virtually in a fair manner privately without any means of disclosure. Although the effectiveness and transparency of such dispute resolution mechanisms remains to be seen, it is sufficient to say the future of arbitrating disputes in Formula I and Sports in general looks promising.
BIBLIOGRAPHY -
[1] Article 12.4 of the Code
[2] Sporting Regulations 2022; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/formula_1_-_sporting_regulations_-_2022_-_iss_6_-_2022-04-29.pdf
[3] Technical Regulations 2022; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/2022_formula_1_technical_regulations_-_iss_3_-_2021-02-19.pdf
[4] Financial Regulations; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/formula_1_-_financial_regulations_-_iss_9_-_2022-02-18.pdf
[5] The official Statutes and Internal Regulations of the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile; https://www.fia.com/fia-statutes-and-internal-regulations
[6] Judicial and Disciplinary Rules; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/basicpage/file/it-ica-rules-09-12-2011.pdf
[7] FIA Practice Directions; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/basicpage/file/ICA-Practice-Directions-EN-2011.pdf
[8] International Court of Appeal; FIA.com; https://www.fia.com/international-court-appeal
[9] The FIA Courts comprise a total of 18 to 36 Judges (the Judges), elected by the FIA General Assembly, pursuant to Article 9.6 of the FIA Statutes. A country may not be represented by more than four judges.
[10] Article 5.2 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules
[11] Article 26 of the FIA Statutes
[12] Article 8 of Appendix A – FIA Anti-Doping Regulations of the Code. A decision of the FIA Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee can be appealed to CAS (Article 15.10 of the Code).
[13] Article 9.1.1 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules
[14] Article 17.3 of the Sporting Regulations lists the penalties and decisions of the stewards that cannot be appealed.
[15] Article 13.2.1 of the Code
[16] Appendix 6 of the 2020 Sporting Regulations; https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/2020_formula_1_sporting_regulations_-_iss_6_-_2020-04-07.pdf
[17] Article 14 of the Code
[18] Stewards dismiss Red Bull request to review Hamilton’s British Grand Prix penalty; Formula1.com; published on 29th July 2021; https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.breaking-stewards-dismiss-red-bull-request-to-review-hamiltons-british-grand.4tB8ExYNrCExZN3QXSPMUP.html
[19]Michael Masi replaced as race director amid FIA structural changes – 17th February 2022 -?https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.michael-masi-replaced-as-race-director-amid-fia-structural-changes.174xskJuXpEIAiXPQ98oPE.html
[20] Fuel Flow Gate’ – Did Ferrari attempt to trick the system and, if so, how could it be done? Craig Scarborough; 20 Mar 2020 ; https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/fuel-flow-gate-did-ferrari-attempt-to-trick-the-system-and-if-so-how-could-it-be-done
[21] Challenging FIA Decisions In Formula One: What Options Do F1 Teams Have? 6 June 2022 By?Yeva Agayan
[22] Key Issues In The Regulatory Structure Of Motorsport; 16 June 2021 By?Chris Bond; https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/a-summary-of-regulatory-issues-in-motorsport