Giedo van der Garde, Sauber, Monza, 2014

Van der Garde should get Sauber seat, court rules

2015 Australian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Giedo van der Garde, Sauber, Monza, 2014The Supreme Court of Victoria has upheld Giedo van der Garde’s claim to a right to drive for Sauber in this weekend’s Australian Grand Prix.

Justice Croft ruled that Sauber must “refrain from taking any action the effect of which would be to deprive Mr van der Garde of his entitlement to participate in the 2015 Formula One Season as one of Sauber’s two nominated race drivers.”

A representative for van der Garde said the driver is “ready, willing and able to preform his obligations” to the team.

Van der Garde had brought a case arguing the team was in breach of its contract with him by giving its two race seats for 2015 to Felipe Nasr and Marcus Ericsson. His claim had previously been upheld by the Swiss courts.

Sauber attempted to reject the case on the grounds that there was insufficient time to prepare a chassis in order for him to be able to drive it safely.

The team has lodged an appeal against the decision which the court will hear at 9:30am local time on Thursday. The verdict can be read in full here (PDF).

2015 F1 season

Browse all 2015 F1 season articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

144 comments on “Van der Garde should get Sauber seat, court rules”

  1. MB (@muralibhats)
    10th March 2015, 23:19

    What a mess

    1. MB (@muralibhats)
      10th March 2015, 23:52

      Can be a contender for another concussion.

    2. Link to Justice Croft’s reasons for judgment here (currently the case on the top of the list):-

      http://scv2.webcentral.com.au/vsc/#

      1. Direct link to the case below. Victorian Supreme Court has tweeted that the judgment is under appeal with the appeal to be heard in the Court of Appeal in just under 2 hours.

        To cut to the chase, this is how Croft J addressed the safety arguments:

        “[28] With respect to the safety, training, insurance and other issues of concern raised by the Respondent in this context, the negative character of the critical dispositive provision is determinative. No relevant issue of public policy arises in this respect as nobody, certainly not the Court, would contemplate that compliance with the Orders would involve compromising safety, training, insurance or other like requirements.”

        His Honour did indicate that, due to the urgency of the situation, his reasons for judgment were less detailed than usual.

        http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2015/80.html
        https://twitter.com/SCVSupremeCourt/status/575470237547548672

        1. the negative character of the critical dispositive provision is determinative.

          @yapapi Well that’s cleared that up then! One from the Ron Dennis book of law there.

          1. Can someone rewrite this in for foreigners understandable english?

          2. @ Ketu
            Even though it is our language I don’t think we can translate it :) ….as Keith Campbell suggested, that is Ron Dennis talk and we don’t understand most of that either.

          3. From the judgment:

            “The critical dispositive provision of the Award grants an order requiring the Respondent, Sauber Motorsport AG, to —

            refrain from taking any action the effect of which would be to deprive Mr. van der Garde of his entitlement to participate in the 2015 Formula One Season as one of Sauber’s two nominated race drivers”

            So if he can’t drive for safety reasons, that’s fine. If he can’t drive because Sauber just don’t want him to, that’s not.

  2. It’s gotta be a really weird situation for Van der Garde to basically be in antagonistic role with a team when he’s basically going to have to place his life in their hands. I mean, I hope it’s obvious that I’m not suggesting that anyone at Sauber would do anything unsafe, it just has to be a weird situation to be, psychologically.

    If he is entitled to the seat, and it sounds like he is, then I’m glad he’s getting it. It’s just weird.

    1. he wont drive, will be a money settlement…

      1. Lack of money is the problem so how can it be the solution.

        1. I get it, but there is no other option

          1. Other solution is Giedo gets the drive. And currently thats all that Giedo wants. After all he is a driver whom wants to drive at the highest platform possible which is F1.
            The question will then be: Who is out? Erricson or Nasr?

          2. GB (@bgp001ruled)
            11th March 2015, 15:28

            now nasr or ericsson or their sponsors will sue sauber!!!!! hahahha

          3. Sauber are stuck between a rock and a hard place, if they agree and give van der Garde the drive then they will be sued a second time by nasr or ericsson’s sponsors who are the ones funding the team in the first place.

    2. They call it a circus don’t they….

    3. It’s a good thing. Contracts should be honored. When something happened, there should be a settlement between them.

      So the phrase ‘Contract just a piece of paper’ or ‘Contract don’t mean anything in F1’ can be rubbished by now.

      Sauber really don’t need to be in this position if they got it right

    4. It is not really any kind of antagonistic situation between sauber and vdg. At most it is antagonistic between the sauber management and vdg. While peter sauber is a person the sauber team is not and personally I see no reason at all for the sauber employees to have any kind of negative feelings towards vdg. People who fix and manage the car are not offended if some other employee sues their corporation they work for for unlawful behaviour. What kind of 5-year old’s logic is this?!

      At most this has the employees trust the sauber management even less because if sauber is willing to do this to their paid and contracted driver (who is also an employee) it could happen to everyone at sauber.

      Are you really suggesting that if the employer tries to unlawfully end(ignore the contract of one of the employees the other employees would instantly side with the employer in such case? No, that doesn’t happen unless the team has huge internal propaganda team like nsa.

      This can put the sauber management into very tricky situation if this mistrust spreads among its employees. Not only could it harm the team publically but it could also cause internal tensions which could make the sauber management less able able to do good job in this tough time sauber is going through now. Or divert resources which would be needed to keep the team afloat to solve interal issues.

      1. This is exactly what I was going to write…assuming that the Sauber employees are going to revolt against vdg due to the lawsuit is ridiculous. There’s much to be concerned about here, but that’s not one of them.

      2. el presidente
        11th March 2015, 17:49

        nice work putting the thoughts of many into words.

        If he eventually drives the team will 100% support him, because the best possible result is only in the interest of the team. If anyone, i think v/dGarde is more likely to be mutinying, but in reality i think they will have a (what we in Dutch call) “Monster-treaty” (enemies collaborating towards a mutual goal)

  3. “Oops. Sorry Giedo, it seems your fuel flow sensor read 101 l/sec during the race. It’s a bummer you were disqualified for that. Oh well.”

    1. That will never happen, team will not sacrifice points cause they are angry, might as well not race.

    2. If Sauber does that they will hurt themselves more because lets say Giedo does end up in the points those points will be taken away (therefore also the money gained for that will be taken away)

    3. people are looking into this wrong, they will not threaten his performance or his danger, their car looks like a real chance for points. they cant sacrifice that.

  4. The question is who will be making way?

    1. And consequently who will be suing Sauber next?

      1. A german guy with a gorgeous girlfriend

        1. @celler Nobody’s going to miss him but how many will miss her?

    2. I’d say Ericsson. I’m just thinking the Banco do Brasil influence is too much for Sauber to let Nasr sit out.

      1. @deej92 On the other hand even if Nasr is out the bank will still get sponsorship anyway, so would they care?

        1. GB (@bgp001ruled)
          11th March 2015, 15:35

          i dont think so! the bank sponsors the team because brasilians will follow nasr and so they will get their brand in the brasilians minds! nasr is out, brasilians dont care about the team, si there is no exposure of their brand to the brasilians, so no sponsoring!

    3. The thing is that Ericssons backers payed Sauber money in November 2014 already. If they give the seat to Van der Garde they will wan’t their money back, and Van der Garde sure aint bringing any. So Sauber can’t afford to give him the seat.

      1. this is a big mess. is he going to court in every country? is he going to sue every team that doesn´t want him?

        1. Just the team that agreed to give him a drive in exchange for something of value from him

        2. No just the one that took millions of dollars from him then reneged on their contract.

        3. el presidente
          11th March 2015, 17:53

          @Marussi : that is a very dumb comment.

  5. Be even more awkward if he stuffed it on the 1st corner..

  6. It’ll be no less awkward than it is for Alonso at McLaren…

  7. Absolutely ludicrous the whole situation.
    First, the way Sauber deal with this. If he had a contract, it should have been terminated before the other signings.
    But VDG is ridiculous too. He expects that the work environment will be good? That Sauber will treat him de same way the others, or even give him a decent car? He will be there because a court rulling, i didn’t like him before, now i like even less.

    1. Yeah, Sauber did bring this on themselves.. VDG isn’t winning any friends playing the situation out like he is though!

      1. I think you are too hard on VDG, any other driver would do the same. He had a contract, he gave up other possible carrier options and then got the boot. Wouldn’t you be upset? Seriously! Sauber messed up so now they are paying for their mistake with the mess.

    2. So you’re saying he should just roll over and give up?

      That’s hardly fair. If anything this is only showing he’s alive, gives him another chance to show what he can do and keeps him with a foot in F1. Otherwise he’d likely not drive anything this year at all.

      1. His F1 career is dead. No other team will go afeter him after this.
        He is a bad driver already, doing this he’s done.
        He should fight for compensation not the seat itself. And his first words on the situation were that what will happen with other drivers it’s not their problem. Well it is his problem, because without that money it’s very likely that Sauber will not survive, and then again he will be without a seat. Yeah, very smart man.

        1. This won’t have the least effect on whether another team would sign him. In fact, if anything it gives him more chance to drive and show if he’s any good. It doesn’t say anything negative about his character that he’s trying to enforce a contract and prevent Sauber from essentially stealing from him. Teams want to sign Alonso and he’s been involved in far, far more suspect behaviour and controversy in his time, and it’s because he’s a good driver. Sutil’s bar fight was also worse than this. The list goes on.

          1. You want to compare Alonso, two time world champion, arguably the best driver in the world with VDG? Even Adrian is better than VDG. Well, if you think it will not affect his career, ok, i think it will.

          2. I don’t think you understand the simple logic of my claim– it’s that talent can get a driver signed even if he has done some very questionable things in his life; therefore doing something that isn’t even a little bit reprehensible won’t affect VDG’s chance in F1 if he can show that he has talent. The calibre of the example drivers is completely irrelevant.

          3. el presidente
            11th March 2015, 17:57

            Speaking of Alonso, …

            He is back at McLaren, isn’t that proof enough that in F1 they don’t really bother about the past?

          4. GB (@bgp001ruled)
            11th March 2015, 19:52

            @chaddy sutils bar fight was worse? do you understand companies? sutils bar fight (i imagine) was on his personal time away from the team! yes, the team wont like something like that, but it doesnt really have something to do with them directly. what vdg is doing is going to his bosses’ throats!!! and no team will want something like that!!! vdgs actions are way way worse than sutils bar fight!

        2. You are blaming VDG for a binding contract Sauber broke? You make no sense.

        3. his talent or ability has nothing to do with it, he has a (apparently) legal binding contract. If your boss fires you when he has no right you would also go to court.

    3. GB (@bgp001ruled)
      11th March 2015, 15:41

      agree with you. he should have asked for the money (which is fair). asking for the seat is ridiculous, but i understand his motivation: if he races he has a better chance to stay in F1. he forgets that teams will take notice of his actions.

  8. Love to see how that is going to work in practice. F1 car takes entire team to run and operate, if the mechanics “decide by themselves” they don’t want to play ball, he won’t even make it out of the garage.

    Also, I can’t imagine this will endear him to any potential future employees. I don’t get this with certain drivers, they fight tooth and nail to get these F1 seats in lesser teams, having to pay millions. I know all drivers have unshakable confidence, but even they must know deep down they’re unlikely never ascend to the top, and surely they’d be better off chasing a paid career in sports cars.

    1. I don’t think he would be anywhere else in F1, ever, if he’s not at Sauber this year. After all, he didn’t impress that much in Caterham two years ago.

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        11th March 2015, 0:01

        To be fair, you’d have to be a racing god to impress in a Caterham. The car was so bad that you can’t expect anyone to shine really.

    2. Maybe the mechanics will love to have him back and think he was shafted before. He’s got as much chance of steeling a point as the new boys. And no points this year, they could all be out of a job.

      Think about it!

      1. Don´t think so.

        After all if he drives the team will lost sposorship money, they pay him off they minus money that the team needs.

        Either way he is not making any friends.

        But drama will made the days interesting until first practice. Wonder what Sauber will do.

    3. I don’t see why the mechanics would have a distaste for VDG. If I were them, I would be extremely disappointed in the management. I don’t think anybody can look at VDG and say that he is doing the wrong thing, or is a bad person. He’s fighting for terms that both sides had agreed on, and I can’t even see how anybody in the team can stand behind such management.

      1. GB (@bgp001ruled)
        12th March 2015, 2:24

        @dpod, you are right about everything. but think about this: the people will be out of a job if the team folds. and the team has found a cornerstone for folding in vdg! so to a certain degree (although he is right in his demands) at least some of the crew might have some bad feelings towards him; he might make them lose their jobs. and yes, it is the teams fault, but not everyone thinks that clearly…

        1. @bgp001ruled

          I guess you’re right about that. I’m sure Monisha and her close advisers will feel that way.

  9. Why have 2 cars when they can fit all 3 drivers into 1!

      1. Brilliant – definitely the solution!

  10. Does he realise that there will now most likely not be a seat to have anyway. I can’t see Sauber surviving when Banco do Brasil pull out because Nasr has been told he can’t drive.

    He must be pretty hated by the guys in the Sauber factory who are now having to look for new jobs. We only have loosers here I feel.

    1. It’s Ericsson out. I think it may get even funnier when Ericsson wins in court and then Nasr and Sauber is obliged to pay a huge sum and dies.

      1. Why would Nasr Has to pay Ericsson? there is no contract between Nasr and Ericsson So Nasr owns Ericsson nothing. Sueing Nasr would only lead to Ericsson having to pay Nasr Lawyers

    2. Actually I do not think so. He is quitte liked in the paddock and a lot of people admire him for taking Sauber to court. It is about time something like this happens. If the contract was not valid he would have lost. Sauber simply cannot afford more damage or obstruction: the judge clearly said… i’m on standby in case you need me…..

  11. We’ve had the Alonso situation, Manor returning and now this. What an unpredictable build-up to the season we’re witnessing.

    Anything else in the locker, F1 world?

    1. Could it be that both the Manor drivers cant get their Super License on time for the race.

      1. Well Will Stevens already has one – he raced in Abu Dhabi last year!

        1. super license has to be renewed each year and was not completed yet.

  12. So the Court is forcing them to put him in a car? Financial compensation I could understand, but forcing this on the team to work with someone they do not want to is junk. I wouldn’t cooperate if I were Sauber.

    If Sauber drops Ericsson or Nasr, we will have another lawsuit. How fun!

    1. I wouldn’t cooperate if I were Sauber

      Contempt of Court would get Ms.Kaltenborne free accommodation in a Victorian jail and the cars seized before the race began, very stupid, but not improbable considering her behaviour to date.

      1. and that would mean the end of Sauber if she decides to go that route

      2. Jail is not on the cards but given the new superlicence rules the compensation will be massive.

  13. What a disaster! Monisha should be fired immediately! Hard to imagine any of this transpiring without her knowledge.

    1. She certanly made a big mistake with this one.

    2. She’s the team principal, hard to imagine any of this transpiring without it being her decision. She is also the one issuing a statement that they won’t do anything to jeopardise safety. Unless Van der Garde just doesn’t fit in the car that is a ludicrous statement.

      This whole mess has torpedoed her career and could be the death of the team if it affects sponsorship deals. I suspect they were already on the precipice of collapse and basically taking the new drivers is all that stopped that happening. I think we’re witnessing the lashing out of an animal backed into a corner fighting for it’s survival.

      And it was a stupid set of decisions because even if they had folded, they were a valuable prospect. If someone wanted to save Manor, someone would have come to the rescue of Sauber. If they still fail and someone does pick up the pieces, she is toast. No way they’re keeping her.

    3. Well, the thing is, that without the up front payment from Ericssons backers its quite possible that Sauber wouldn’t be even able to be on the grid at all by now @philipgb, @celeste, @72defender.

      Seen in that light, She, or rather the whole team were between a rock and a hard place. They had VdGarde who was promised a seat but possibly no contract signed, they had Sutil contracted to the team for another year too at that time. I think they were really between a rock and a hard place.

      1. I think I covered that being a very real possibility. But it’s been handled badly. Marussia folded with dignity because their Russian sponsor pulled the plug. But they’ve been saved because they convinced someone they were worth it.

        Sauber in this while debacle which could still see them collapse have not won any friends. I’m sure if things do go belly up someone will bag a bargain team, but the management will be the first to go.

      2. @bascb but if you had the necessity there should be a “right” to terminate a spoken agreement. I get they need it the money from Erickson and Nasr, and I don´t judge her for making the decision, but for the way that was made that let the team expoised to this kind of mess.

        1. Sure, but as Sauber didn’t even inform VdGarde up front (meaning they did never terminate any agreement they had with him) its their mistake for “sticking their heads in the sand” @celeste, @bgp001ruled.

          Instead they should have probably informed VdGarde that they would not be able to provide any seats without extra money and given him a date until when to guarantee extra funding or terminate the previous agreement because circumstances had changed.

          They didn’t make any effort at all to solve this and just ignored what they promised. That is probably why the Swiss court did already rule in favour of VdGarde and the AUS court upheld that verdict now.

      3. GB (@bgp001ruled)
        12th March 2015, 2:34

        @bascb so you think the best solution they could think of is/was suicide? because in the end that is what they/monisha have/has done! either way they will lose money (and a significant amount) and they wont recover! the “easy” way for them would be to pay vdg: yes, they dont have the money, but at least that problem would be solved. vdg wants the seat: they will not only also loose money (from the new drivers sponsors going away), they will again go to court because of being sued by these sponsors!!! they are finished!

    4. Wasn’t she the team lawyer before principle? You would think she would know the law better.

    5. This is really a common case for a struggling team.
      Remember Manor/Marussia STILL owes payment to Glock after his contract was broken in a winter 2 years ago! Also, 2 years after Trulli’s contract was broken by Caterham in a winter test,he had to sue Caterham to gain his payment…..

  14. vd Garde is absolutely right to claim his seat. He was the first one to sign the contract.
    Will Sauber sabotage the car? Unfortunately I think they might.

    1. Sauber cannot afford sabotage.

  15. Suddenly three-car teams doesn’t seem such a bad idea to Sauber.

    Seriously though where do you begin with this one? When Sutil said last year the two drivers Sauber had signed wouldn’t necessarily be the ones driving for them, clearly he knew something…

    1. @keithcollantine – I blame the management at Sauber. You can’t sign a driver and then not run them, without having paid them off or had a clause in the contract or anything. It’s just not right. They should have just paid him off and forgot about it but they didn’t, and now he’s had to take matters into his own hands and therefore it has been taken out of Sauber’s control. It’s a sorry sorry mess, and I’m shocked that any team could let a situation get to this stage. However, having seen van der Garde win his case, I wonder if this will spark Sutil into action too?

    2. The other thing that this could raise is paragraph 13.7 of the sporting regulations which reads:

      If in the opinion of the F1 Commission a competitor fails to operate his team in a manner compatible with the standards of the Championship or in any way brings the Championship into disrepute, the FIA may exclude such competitor from the Championship forthwith.

    3. I remembered that one well. My thoughts were at that time … They would quietly deal together and that would be it.. But i think it is about time that this is really happening.

  16. he wont drive, that would be just too awkward. But I agree with what he is doing, Sauber messed up and dropped him like a sack of potatoes once they found a higher pay driver. Strictly for money. Well, I’m sure they will settle now and pay out his contract. He has a right, he lost other potential employment because of Sauber so they need to pay up the pony’s.

    1. If he just wanted a settlement he could have gone to the Swiss courts at any time. He obviously wants to be in the car and couldn’t do anything until Sauber and their assets were under Australian jurisdiction.

      Too bad this might get him unofficially blacklisted by any team that doesn’t need a pay driver. Good job killing your own dreams Giedo.

      1. If Alonso can return to Maclaren after having them Dsqd for a year and fined $100m because he wasn’t given priority over Hamilton, I’m sure vdg can buy another seat.

      2. Err.. He did go the Swiss court and he did win the case.

      3. He did go to the Swiss courts. And he won. Sauber chose to ignore the judgement. That is why he went to the Australian court too, and he has won again.

        1. He actually went to an arbitral tribunal (essentially the same as going to court, except the nature of proceedings is agreed between the parties and the ruling is usually kept confidential) rather than the Swiss courts.

          1. Fair enough. But the overall point is he that already had the decision in his favour prior to this judgement in Australia, and Sauber just ignored it.

      4. @Spawinte, if you think this will blacklist GVD, you are sadly wrong. This is nothing comapared to what “other” drivers have done in the soap opera that is F1 over the years and still had flourishing careers after the incidents, ie: spygate as an example.

        GVD is being honest, he is abiding by his contract Sauber prematurely terminated for “their” best interest. You can be a follower in life or a leader, GVD is leading his life.

  17. The team has brought this upon themselves, sadly enough. They deserve their place on the grid, surely……but the way they handle and despose of (test)drivers these last couple of years is just not right. This always comes back to you in one way or another. Giedo has a contractual right to a Sauber raceseat this season. Sauber made a descision by signing other drivers, while they already had signed contracts with their current (test)drivers at that moment. They knew this was coming, and having heard their ridiculous defence, they didn’t expect this to go to court at all. But it did, and it ruled in favour of Giedo. So let’s see what happens……what a start of the season!!

  18. Good for him. A contract is a contract and Sauber didn’t stand by their word. They also thought they could pull a fast one. All their arguments in court were so disingenuous and purely a result of trying to not end up in court again. Now they sort of have to run only 1 car (unclear if that’s allowed by the court) because their safety arguments won’t disappear. Hypocrites or liars– not great options for sauber

  19. So now it goes: A good legal team trumps a lot of money which trumps talent.

    1. Truth trumps legal obfuscation.

    2. To be fair, if Sauber entered into a contract with van der Garde, they can’t disregard that just because another driver comes along presumably with a larger amount of money.

    3. None of the drivers at Sauber is there because of his talent recently @rjoconnell. Sirotking was supposed to drive for bringing Russian money, then DeSilvestro was supposed to drive and bring a nice amount, when that fell through Sauber got money from VdGarde for his 3rd driver / FP1 drives and the promise to pay more for the race seat in 2015.
      Then Ericsson was signed because he was able to pay up front (meaning they already had an issue with Sutil being contracted for 2015, but Sutil was there partly for his experience but also for bringing some money with him) and when Sauber got the offer of Nasr and a lot of Brazillian money they signed him and apparently failed to even inform VdGarde up front, or give him the opportunity to up their offer.

      Yes, Sauber was/is on the brink. But ignoring existing contracts/agreements is never going to work, especially not in a situation where your debtors are standing on the doorstep already. Afterall everyone still wants their money, so its still in their interests to somehow agree a deal to enable the team to pay up instead of going bust.

  20. It’ll be a financial settlement. He’s just saying he’s prepared to honour his end of the deal whilst Sauber can’t. They’d be breaking a contract with Nasr or Ericsson otherwise. They’ll have to buy him out of the contract.

  21. So does this mean in every country they race in he will have to get a court ruling? The story I read said the Swiss court told him to have the court in Austrailia enforce it as well. Odd situation. Isn’t Nasr funding most of that team?

    1. banco does that yeah, marcus did pay in september i think. and he brings more then vdg. its a big mess

    2. So does this mean in every country they race in he will have to get a court ruling?
      No it doesnt:
      Statement: It should also be borne in mind in relation to futility that the critical dispositive
      provision sought to be enforced applies to the whole of the 2015 Formula 1 Season —
      not just in relation to the coming few days in Melbourne for the Australian Grand
      Prix.

      1. Kyle (@hammerheadgb)
        11th March 2015, 13:08

        While the Australian court states that the provision applies to the whole 2015 F1 season; if Sauber were to breach the ruling on foreign soil, I struggle to see how Australian law could intervene.

        1. I guess that depends on private international law treaties. Either way, his case is stronger for having won once already.

  22. Highly unlikely, but be hilarious if he won!

  23. Don’t they have one of those demonstration chassis with two seats that they use at PR events? Ericsson and Nasr could drive that one together and Giedo could drive a single seater.

    1. That’s what I call a pragmatic solution.

  24. An appeal will follow and a settlement will be arranged – this is all VDG is aiming for!
    Then he will be announced as the 2nd driver for Manor. Nasr and Ericsson will race for Sauber this weekend.

    1. I dont think so, I think Giedo wants to drive

  25. Impressed with Giedo standing up for his right, but very disappointed by Sauber to betray a contract and get into this mess when they were for me THE upstanding team in F1.

    Funny to see the comments above that Sauber mechanics would sabotage their team car. Oh F1 fans.. *facepalm*

    1. It’s not unjustified. We DID see in the past a team sabotage one of their drivers… *cough*Andrea Moda *cough*

  26. Essentially, the Court has decided it is not the appropriate place to decide upon any technical aspects of the case and has just referred to the previous ruling. It has told Sauber that “you’ve already lost the ruling, so respect it”.

    This is going to be endlessly appealed until an injunction can be secured.

    1. VdGarde’s team has already lodged a request for that with the AUS court yeah @kazinho

  27. Since Peter handed off the team to Kaltenborn, it became a complete shame. I used to be Sauber fan since Alesi and Raikkonen times and last seasons with Peter gave us Kobayashi and Perez, but now it’s just a shame team.

  28. How a background as an accountant qualified her to run an F1 team we will never know, yet now she will re-analyze the spreadsheet. GvdG doesn’t really want to drive, he wants his money back – which now he will get. Good for him!

    1. I doubt Giedo wants money.. he is a race driver and he wants to drive. But everything has its price. And Buying out after this lawsuit will definately not be cheap for Sauber.

  29. I wonder if his ruling includes an injunction against them using the car without him?

    If he does end up in the seat come weekend there’s precedent for a driver not trusting his team set by Alonso in 2007. They’ll be FIA representatives all over them ensuring they aren’t purposefully working against him.

    1. VdGarde’S team has filed for an injunction to make sure Sauber does not ignore the court @philipbg by now.

  30. As I said, they won’t be racing in Melbourne. Sauber can’t run without all of their 3 contracted race drivers and their only option is to sit it out.

    10 years ago I could see VDG been given a medical and being failing on some small issue. Don’t see that happening now though.

  31. I think this is something where the FIA needs to step in and take action. If the court is right and VDG had a legitimate contract that Sauber just ignored as it sounds like from this, the team needs to be punished in some way by the FIA. If contracts aren’t honored or enforced, that just makes the whole sport look bad. If the team had an exit clause in the contract they should have used it and presented that in court, the seat fitting argument was irrelevant.

    1. I totally agree with you. Very shameful for the sport in general. Sauber should be punished.

  32. The pic with this story for next caption competition please there could be some great ones!

  33. Having read court ruling and being a lawyer I can note a few things.

    First of all, this court was not deciding the final outcome of the case. The case was solved by court of arbitration (I think it was in Switzerland). The ruling of the court of arbitration is final and cannot be apealed. The essence of arbitration is that parties agree to solve problems in the court of arbitration, therefore court doesn’t have jurisdiction in such case. Such case is solved behind closed doors, it’s private dispute and decison is final. Sauber lost the case there and then, but not today.

    Second, today court was considering wether to enforce mentioned ruling of the court of arbitration. Court of arbitration cannot enforce decisions because it is private, not public entity, therefore rulings are enforced by national courts.

    Third, there must be some serious reasons for such ruling not to be enforced, such as one of the parties were not infored about hearing or decision is against public interest. Court hasn’t found any of these grouds, therefore it had no choice but to enforce ruling of the court of arbitration.

    All in all, Sauber is actually powerless in current situation and appeal will not save them, because case was lost way much earlier.

    1. Thanks for clarifying how these things work. It only makes Sauber’s actions look even more incomprehensible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.