Christian Horner, Red Bull, Miami International Autodrome, 2023

Red Bull dismisses complaint against Horner after investigation

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Christian Horner will remain as team principal of Red Bull’s F1 team following the dismissal of a complaint made against him.

An independent inquiry was launched following complaints raised by a member of the team’s staff against Horner, who had denied all allegations made against him.

Following the investigation, the complaint against Horner was dismissed. Team owner Red Bull Austria announcing that no further action will be taken against him. Horner will continue to lead the team into its 20th season of competition, which begins this weekend in Bahrain.

“The independent investigation into the allegations made against Mr Horner is complete, and Red Bull can confirm that the grievance has been dismissed,” said a Red Bull spokesperson. “The complainant has a right of appeal.”

“Red Bull is confident that the investigation has been fair, rigorous and impartial,” they continued. “The investigation report is confidential and contains the private information of the parties and third parties who assisted in the investigation and therefore we will not be commenting further out of respect for all concerned.”

Christian Horner
Profile: Christian Horner
“Red Bull will continue striving to meet the highest workplace standards,” it concluded.

The announcement concludes a turbulent month for the team, who have been working to prepare for this weekend’s season-opening Bahrain Grand Prix. Red Bull had been coming under pressure due to the length of the investigation, with Jim Farley – CEO of the team’s 2026 power unit collaborators Ford – reported to have written to the team expressing his concern over their lack of transparency with them about the investigation. Horner was not suspended by the team during the investigation and was present for the three-day pre-season test held at the Bahrain International Circuit last week.

The 50-year-old team principal has run Red Bull since the team’s first season in 2005, following the drinks company’s purchase of the then-Jaguar team. Over 19 seasons, Red Bull have competed in 369 grands prix, taking 113 victories, 264 podium finishes, seven drivers’ world championships between Sebastian Vettel and Max Verstappen and six constructors’ championship titles.

Red Bull enjoyed the most dominant season in the sport’s history in 2023, winning all but one of the 22 grands prix held as Verstappen cruised to his third consecutive world title with 19 wins, as team mate Sergio Perez finished second. The team’s combined points total of 860 was the highest score by any team in the sport’s history.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

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

137 comments on “Red Bull dismisses complaint against Horner after investigation”

  1. I guess like any job its an internal matter and it has been dealt with

    1. But it’s not just any job.

      I’m not saying there is anything wrong with the process or decision, but with such high profile positions, there’s bound to be loads of speculation and talk about it. People naturally want to know why.

      1. It is always going to feel like an unsatisfactory conclusion since it wouldn’t be reasonable (or indeed legal) to publish all the details of the allegation, evidence and process, allowing people to draw their own conclusions. This isn’t a public court case or an F1 stewards’ enquiry – it is a corporate matter that would no doubt have remained completely confidential had it not been leaked to the media. So we have to accept that we’re only ever going to get part of the story.

      2. People naturally want to know why.

        Yes, but they have no right to.

        Keeping things confidential protects both the accuser and accused. It is the same when the police investigates a complaint and finds no reason to charge anyone. They don’t just publish everyone’s private details, life choices and whatever to satisfy the nosy people.

        1. The real issue is that Red Bull Gmbh is a private company. It’s not a public company with disclosure requirements to shareholders.
          So why did it announce this in the first place?
          Have they ever announced any private employee grievance to the world press previously?
          It’s clearly a smokescreen that has backfired to mask a powerplay.

          1. Because some Dutch media came out with the story?

      3. As both @red-andy and Ludewig rightly point out, the details remain private to avoid causing more harm than needed. While it is to be expected that people would like to know more (“everything”), it is not reasonable to actually do so.

      4. Actually, it is just like any job.
        Your belief that somehow you’re entitled to more just because you watch the sport is wildly optimistic.
        If you want a say in the internal matters, buy the team or the company.

    2. Such a weird outcome to a weird saga though, why did they let it become such a big deal in the first place? Only now to leave probably more questions in people’s minds.

      1. Who ever was leaking information to the Dutch press might not fare well in the time to come. wink wink, nudge nudge. If Ford are still on board, which I suspect they will be, they have quite a bit to gain from the venture.

        Albon to RBR, probably, Perez to Williams, maybe.

        Perez to beat Verstappen this year ? Probably, and Max’s dad ? an interesting point of speculation.

        1. Perez might beat Max’s dad, @pcxmac.

    3. As far as I can tell, there is no mention of inappropriate behavior and that’s the key takeaway cause if there was no inappropriate behavior they would mention it.

    4. obviously it’s not just an internal matter. Lol, we don’t even know what it was, but if it was some kind of sexual bulling then society as a whole has to care. Because, why do I even have to say this, organisations look after themselves and can’t be trusted not to cover things up

      Not that I’m saying he did anything. But the so called enquiry was as fake as it gets

      BTW… anyone seen Jos lately?

      1. Jos was Rallying.
        Anyone can go to the Dutch press.

      2. How could you know though? It’s not like we know anything really. So as long as he isn’t found guilty of something, the investigation will be fake? Who knows what’s the truth, but I could accuse him too and there would be an investigation…

        1. It comes down to trust.

          Cards on the tenner, I really dislike Horner and RBR. However, I don’t think it likely that this is a cover up. There is too much at stake, and Red Bull will have been very careful to cover their behinds. If they didn’t have a high level of evidence, the accuser would likely be able to quit and sue for constructive dismissal, which would massively damage everyone involved. The risks are just too high.

        2. we know it was fake because they had it and we don’t know anything. They set it up so we wouldn’t know anything. They could’ve written that statement before it even started, i mean it’s marking their own homework and setting it too, so we can only try and not guess too much

          Personally I’m considering if it was a power struggle involving Jos, but that’s mostly because I don’t like him and if I was Christian I’d have been trying to get him out of the garage. But, that’s just a story in my head, unless he disappears

    5. A generous settlement is my guess.

  2. A statement, and situation, that leaves far more questions than answers in my opinion.

    However, I completely respect wanting to keep details and specifics private of course.

    1. There is a slight gap between the outcome of the report by the independent investigator (unknown), and the dismissal of the complaint as reported.
      The inquiry could be: 1) conclusively dismissing the claimed facts of the complaint; 2) supporting some facts but not resulting in a (serious) offence of law/internal rules; 3) lack of conclusive evidence; 4) other. Each of these instances could’ve led to dismissing the claim.

      I guess enough room for further speculations until they start the engines.

      1. Or the most likely option that they settled and settlement required Red Bull being able to salvage the brand’s, team’s, and principal’s integrity in exchange for a huge payoff.

        1. someone or something
          28th February 2024, 17:22

          That’s what you consider ‘the most likely option’? Like, seriously?

          1. Can you think of a better one? No, they dismissed it and everyone will now keep it a secret. Does that sound more plausible to you?

            It’s not like the employee can remain at Red Bull after making that allegation (she could but it’s going to be extremely difficult for her to enjoy that) and she would clearly want to retain her anonymity if she intends to work in F1 (unless she is again part of some masochism club).

            I can’t imagine Horner wanting to take part in a lawsuit for months that last months and I can’t imagine Red Bull, Ford, or F1 being happy with that either. God forbid, he’s found guilty or the details are publicized and are enough to condemn Red Bull and Horner in the public eye, even if courts don’t.

            Play all those scenarios and there is no upside. Just having no memes are worth 20 million. To be able to say you dismissed it and you even gave them the right to appeal but clearly they realized the error of their ways and did not appeal…

            There’s so much at stake… They are the reigning champions, they have a relationship with so many sponsors, they own a massive brand with so many sports affiliations, there is F1 and the entire sport.

            That’s worth a pretty penny, for sure.

          2. “Can you think of a better one?”

            Yes, the accusation was baseless made on bad faith. People can be vindictive and make false accusations just to damage people’s reputations. His name has been dragged through the press, people like you regard him as guilty based on nothing but the allegation.

            Given the matter can still be taken to court, it is a conspiracy theory to say that Red Bull & the outside legal personnel that did the investigation conspired to cover it up. If it went to court the details would all be made available, cover up or no cover up.

            But sure believe Horner, Red Bull Racing, Red Bull GmbH and the legal representative lied and denied the supposed victim her outcome, rather than it being a baseless accusation.

          3. Actually, that is a possible scenario but it’s also career suicide and for that person to have access to Horner which means they are not a low level employee, it seems a bit unlikely.

            I never said conspired or cover up. If there’s any substance to the claim or even the possibility of making a case, then paying is a no-brainer. It will happen either way so why subject the company and the sport to the black eye. It would also make the person more than whole in most circumstances.

          4. someone or something
            28th February 2024, 23:06

            they dismissed it and everyone will now keep it a secret. Does that sound more plausible to you?

            Well, yes. I don’t know what exactly did or did not happen, nor do I plan to lose any sleep over it.
            The thing is, there is absolutely nothing that screams “implausible” about their statement. Your theory, however, requires a metric tonne of additional, unprovable assumptions. I should probably add “baseless” to the list of adjectives.

        2. Michael that’s quite unlikely given the statement, “The complainant has a right of appeal” which in the case of a settlement if waived.

          1. I find that interesting and potentially a masterstroke. That’s why the lawyer or barrister makes the money that they make – I suspect Red Bull hired someone who could work magic.

            Why even mention it? What does it add? That sentence does exonerate Red Bull and Horner fully along with the clever omission of the word behavior, does it not?

            They didn’t provide the details but they made sure to stress that the complainant has a right of appeal, should they choose to exercise it. And note the subtle, nuanced choice of words – complainant vs employee. Killing them softly with cotton…

            That’s what separates an IQ of 120 from an IQ of 160…

  3. How surprising. Here’s a generic corporate message with no meaning or no information.

    Just trust us.

    1. What else do you want them to do? Throw out all personal statements of the parties involved? Would be completely illegal in most countries.

    2. Tell everyone that you don’t understand what the statement says without actually saying it…

      Of course no information was going to be provided, both parties have legal privacy protection. Anybody thinking there was going to be a full explanation and every detail released to the public was foolish.

  4. This reminds me of something else…
    Does this now mean he will have to secretly reduce the power of his pp for entire 2024 season?

    1. I think fans should collectively boycott redbull instead for this season after this waste of time that’s only created more questions. They don’t deserve any more attention after being idiots

  5. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
    28th February 2024, 15:51

    What a curious affair this has all been.

    Legitimate complaint? Hack journalism? Coup d’etat? Still absolutely none the wiser.

    1. Illegitimate complaint, sexed up by a hack journalist that is not backtracking massively. De Telegraaf seemed to be the only source in this story, and it is pretty obvious that they were blatantly misrepresenting what they claimed to have seen.

      No doubt the journalist and the complainant have received handsome payments in to their accounts from an Austrian bank account, just less than they would have got if they had been able to get Horner fired.

      1. now backtracking…

  6. So, over to the courts I suspect.

    1. I doubt it… that would be the same as losing. They have money so it’s not really an issue. She had all the chips and the clock was ticking against Red Bull. It was just coming up with the right figure.

    2. Doubtful, if the investigation found no evidence of inappropriate behaviour and claims of wrongdoing have been dismissed, then there won’t be enough to satisfy the greater evidence criteria of legal proceedings. Even in a gynocentric world.

      1. if the investigation found no evidence of inappropriate behaviour

        So someone brought a claim with no inappropriate behaviour and they needed to hire an external law firm and have Horner debriefed for days before the start of the season and then Red Bull chose not to get ahead of it and share the contents of the baseless claim to acquit themselves in the public eye.

        You could be right but I assume the lawyers and publicists that they retained didn’t just graduate from college.

        1. False accusations exist, especially by people motivated with revenge or financial reward.

          The details were never going to be released, if you think that is a reason to claim there has been some sort of stitch up that just reflects badly on you. All parties are protected under the law, they have a right to privacy which means there are no grounds for publishing the report. Nor is there indeed any justification for it.

  7. I’m not overly fond of Horner but it’s nice to see that the pressure of a trial by media & particularly the Mercedes lot didn’t get what they were pushing for. Trying to manipulate the situation & put words in people’s mouths.

    1. No one in the paddock said anything bad about Christian Horner including anyone from Mercedes and Mclaren, everyone asked for transparency and fair trial of affairs so that it would set precedence for the future cases.

      1. What precedence needs setting? If a serious accusation gets levied on someone, you carry out an investigation and act on the findings. I’m pretty sure that was already standard procedure.

      2. Zac Brown said some pretty inflammatory things didn’t he.

    2. Mercedes literally said nothing negative about Horner during this entire saga. Have no idea why you mentioned them and singled them out.

      1. Because Mercedes EVIL!!!! Toto Wolff BAD!!!

        Don’t you read the internet?

        1. you mean the usual stupidity of the bullies lot?

        2. Not all Germans are Evil or Bad … I have learned that a long time ago when i was young brought up with all Germans are evil… (My family suffered a lot of losses in WWII by the hands of the Germans)
          But during vacations i met young German people and found out they were like me and very nice to me.

          So ignore any internet comments and find out yourself by meeting the Germans yourself.

  8. And now we wait for the knife to turn on whoever leaked to the Dutch media…

  9. Whitewashed. As expected. No smoke without fire. Just look at the way he left his heavily pregnant wife for a Spice Girl. The man, if you could stretch to calling him that, is completely devoid of any morality. Disgraceful.

    1. What would be disgraceful would be taking a decision based upon preconceived ideas as to his character rather than the facts of the case.

    2. You / We who know absolutely nothing, repeat nothing, claiming an independent outside inquiry is a whitewash, while trying insunite personal matters from years gone by as a reason for any claim been made now having credibility. I’m glad you don’t run the legal system in this country as an accusation would automatically mean a conviction.

      1. Exactly. Any accusation automatically leading to a burning at the stake is not good for anyone. Couldn’t I accuse you of something for no reason? Then, what do you do?

        The Crucible is a timeless work and the passing of time doesn’t seem to make people more civilised!

        1. Indeed, in which case we all certainly have that specific person we’d like to get revenge on: accused!

    3. It’s perfectly fine to think less of Horner for the way he left his wife. It is an abhorrent story from the way it’s been publicized. But that doesn’t mean any allegation made against him afterwards is therefore true.

    4. how do you know he wasn’t setup and she was only ever looking for a payout in lieu of a major venture/business move?

    5. Thats the problem with “the internet”.
      All kind of creeps crawl out of the woodwork to make these kind of remarks.

    6. You’re one of those guilty until proved innocent types, huh? Having been falsely accused of something before I can tell you there can be smoke without fire and it’s an awful feeling.

      1. Absolutely, there’s even people who ended up in prison or even executed before proof was found they were innocent, so this guilty until proven innocent needs to stop.

    7. Well, I saw you drowning kittens the other day. Moreover, I have evidence on video. What do you have to say about that?

  10. We will learn the real outcome of the investigation by the end of 2026 when Christian Horner’s contract with RBR will expire. There’s too much at stake at the moment for RBR to fire Horner.

    1. What’s at stake for the moment? They are at the summit, have the best engineer, (one of) the best driver, a big contract with Ford for the next gen F1…. All is in place…

      Was the perfect time to get rid of him, imho.

      1. HAL,
        Following Dietrich Mateschitz’s passing, a noticeable power struggle has emerged within Red Bull. Christian Horner’s emphasis on Mateschitz’s vision during the RB20 presentation speaks volumes about the internal dynamics.

        The newly appointed Red Bull Sports CEO Oliver Mintzlaff has clashed with both Horner and Marko regarding the potential sale of the second Red Bull team. From the perspective of the board of directors, the team’s utility is questioned, and its costs are deemed unjustifiable. Horner had to elucidate the “benefits” of retaining a second F1 team in a meeting with the board.

        The trio of Newey, Horner, and Marko resisted the Porsche takeover, advocating for RBR’s autonomy. Austrian shareholders, not particularly fond of Horner, align with Helmut Marko’s bid for leadership while the Thai shareholders are supporting Horner. Marko also garners support from Verstappen, whose father may have leaked an internal investigation report to a Dutch tabloid.

        Ford has urged RBR for transparency, sending two letters and pressing for transparency and feedback following the investigation. Newey’s stance is pivotal, given his contractual ties to RBR until at least 2026, amidst rumors linking him to Christian Horner. While speculation abounds, it is certain that Newey prefers a less “noisy” work environment.

        What’s at stake for the moment ?

        Everything you’ve mentioned, including Verstappen, could vanish in an instant. Horner’s departure could set off a chain reaction, potentially leading to Newey’s departure and consequently prompting Verstappen to follow suit.

        1. Newey is the only truly indispensable person. Anyone can win him with him leading a stable organization.

          1. Although if you go back to 2014-2020 you see that even with newey you don’t always get a winning car, the engine does a lot too.

  11. So whoops, all media and persons making him guilty before proven guilty.

    And most of all telegraaf has proven to be the swamp of journalism, again. Just never use them as a source as they are the worst of sutch media

  12. Mysterious. No detail whatsoever.
    You can’t cause that much trouble to a business like RBR, and be found to be in the wrong, and still enjoy guarded privacy.
    But if they want to, the F1 press can ferret out the details. For some reason they prefer not to.

    1. Could be anything… Could be a misunderstanding between the two people. Could be that the accuser lied. Could be that the accuser was right but the investigation couldn’t find any proof. Trying to make an example of someone who reports inappropriate conduct would be an extremely bad idea as it would put people off making legitimate complaints in future.

      This is an internal company investigation so nothing should be made public. If the FIA or the police want to investigate further, they are free to do so.

      1. If the issue was to do with bullying behaviour: If you work for someone like Horner you have to expect a lack of small talk, an urgency, an impatience, a need for things to be done by yesterday rather than today. Exchanges may be short and sharp unless you are a gifted employee who is on his wavelength and so can relieve him of the need for any of the above.
        If you are not that gifted and efficient employee, then in fairness should there be a place for you in the organisation?

        1. If you work for someone like Horner you have to expect a lack of small talk, an urgency, an impatience, a need for things to be done by yesterday rather than today.

          I essentially agree with your sentiment, however I also believe that individuals rights preclude employers having unreasonable expectations. And nowadays such rights seem to be exercised more vigorously than in the past.

          I should add the caveat that I am not suggesting such rights should not exist, but – if I am understanding RR correctly – I agree, people should have a realistic expectation of what their roles may entail. (though all of this may have nothing to do with the situation at hand).

  13. Tbh I always found it a bit weird this was being done so publically? I always figured things like this would happen behind closed doors. As it hasn’t, we’ve not been told a lot of information because we don’t have a right to know it but told enough for there to be a story. There’s just as much possibility this is something as much as it is nothing and we’ll never really know, and frankly we shouldn’t have at all if it was indeed a personal issue between Horner and another.

    Tbh I find it more fascinating that there’s so much cloak and dagger going on at the top of F1, from the arguments to Sulayem saying ‘he knows who’s attacking him’, the Wolff saga and now this with Horner. Certainly seems ‘someone’ has it in for some of the most powerful names in the sport lately.

    1. someone or something
      28th February 2024, 16:51

      Tbh I always found it a bit weird this was being done so publically?

      Someone leaked it to Dutch press, forcing Red Bull’s hand. Who did it, and why, remains an intriguing question. But we might never know.
      Had this not happened, Red Bull might’ve tried to keep the internal investigation internal.

    2. It was done so publicly to cause as much reputational damage as they could. The internal investigation has cleared him, but as evidenced by the comments here alone, some still class him as guilty simply because there was an allegation.

  14. I am not an RB fan, however, this is absolutely the correct way to handle the matter, and because they are part of a sport that is in the public eye, are forced to weather the public opinions associated with. Done and dusted. Let’s move on to the next issue. As to the complainant, if there needs to be further action, take it up with your attorney. And as to the person(s) investigated, I hope that they don’t take this as an opportunity to spout about the matter, publicly, during future interviews.

  15. Something tells me this isn’t over, seeing as “the complaint was dismissed” and “innocent” aren’t necessarily the same thing. Even if it was nothing there’s clearly something going on in RBR and it won’t stop here.

    1. Next logical step for the complainant, assuming their position is now untenable (depending if they continue to work in proximity to Horner) would be to resign, lawyer up to mitigate potential for defamation, and go straight to the papers and cash the deets in for £500,000. I hope it happens!

    2. There is a 100 page report by an external party, so whatever people may speculate, Red Bull covered their bases. Whether the complainant appeals or otherwise does we’ll see, but I doubt Red Bull Austria would jeopardize their business on technicalities.

    3. It literally means innocent, the complaint was dismissed, the evidence did not support the complaint.

      You, right here, are exactly the reason why vindictive false allegations are made, because in the eyes of some an allegations equals guilt. I can only hope it doesn’t take a truly life destructive allegation against to make people finally realise they are wrong.

      1. Saying something happened doesn’t prove absolute guilt sure, but dismissing it doesn’t mean absolute innocence either, especially as there’s little information to go with said dismissal. Certainly if there was nothing to investigate there wouldn’t have been an investigation to start with.

        1. There was an allegation and the protocol is there should be an inquiry.

  16. Reads like a financial settlement was agreed upon. wonder if it will impact the RB budget cap. :)

    1. Not really, given “the complainant has a right of appeal”.

      1. Maybe the appearance was part of the deal. For another $10 million, why not make it sound as if you’re wrong even though you’re right.

        1. someone or something
          28th February 2024, 17:14

          Did somebody order a tinfoil hat?

          1. I did receive one but I guess they accidentally dropped it off at my home – it’s clearly labeled for someone or something.

      2. Right of appeal is standard procedure. There is nothing to read in to, it is a person’s right to appeal an outcome, nothing more.

        1. Not if they’ve been offered, and accepted, a settlement.

          1. Any talk of settlement is just conspiracy theory…

    2. Reads like a financial settlement was agreed upon. wonder if it will impact the RB budget cap. :)

      Reads like exactly the opposite of a financial settlement.
      It even states so clearly in the statement by Red Bull: “investigation () complete” and “the grievance has been dismissed”!

      1. That’s predicated on the assumption that Red Bull are required by law to share everything with us and tell the truth.

        What’s the word that you’re looking for? Inappropriate behavior… The statement says the investigation is complete and the complaint has been dismissed and that the investigation has been fair, rigorous and impartial.

        Does it mention behavior anywhere or dispel inappropriate behavior? Nyet comrade!

  17. I doubt we will find anything else out about this unless the complainant feels so aggreived that they’re willing to go public and risk the potential backlash from fans and media scrutinization.
    The fact the story was leaked to a Dutch tabloid is interesting though. My suspicions are that Jos had something to do with leaking the story. I just don’t see Max as the type to gossip, his father on the other hand…

    1. someone or something
      28th February 2024, 17:20

      I would be beyond surprised if this aspect of the affair could simply be explained by someone or their father feeling backstabby and just chatting to the press. I would assume that someone’s henchman’s henchman gets sent to spread the message, preferably in some unrelated country. The Netherlands connection is so in-your-face, it wouldn’t surprise me if it turned out to be a false flag operation.

  18. As expected.

    1. also your reply is as expected ;)

      1. Do you see any mention that there was no inappropriate behavior? Why avoid it and circle around it?

  19. “Has been dismissed” has a dismissive connotation and makes it sound trivial.

    1. Standard language in complaint handling – a complaint is either upheld or dismissed.

      1. Never heard that in HR.

        1. I guess all of the complaints made against you were upheld, rather than dismissed then :) ;p

          1. Very likely indeed;)

          2. I guess we can ask Keith and see if he upheld your complaints? :-)

        2. Then you never worked in HR department of a real company

    2. It is legal terminology that you would expect to be used in this situation.

  20. Well handled. Also gives the accuser a proper opportunity to appeal. Makes the investigation only more credible.

    Erik van Haren will be interesting to follow moving forward. He got this one wrong clearly.

    1. Can you envision a situation where you would let that come out when you can easily bury it while appearing to not bury it? They have the best lawyers and unlimited budgets all working to do damage limitation.

    2. Erik van Haren will be interesting to follow moving forward. He got this one wrong clearly.

      He, today, claims that the person involved is still considering legal action, and had no interest in being bought off.

      We’ll see, I guess.

      1. But he is backtracking massively, attempting to spin the narrative to one in which he & De Telegraaf were simply reporting that the lady in question was initiating internal investigations, trying to rewrite history to remove how they claimed to have seen the messages, and claimed they were of sexually suggestive nature and send over a period of time, intimating that Horner was guilty of serious sexual misconduct.

      2. They have likely not been bought off as in that case Red Bull will simply state the accusations were dropped or something.

        In any case, an independent lawyer had full evidence in front of them and made the decision. I don’t have any reason to believe something other than this outcome will be present in the court.

        Companies in this day and era are far more worried about optics and I’m sure RB would have sacked Horner than go through this ordeal if there was anything incriminating.

        1. dropping the accusation is too incriminating and suspect

          you mentioned an independent lawyer which is hilarious. There’s no such thing as an independent lawyer. My name is Charles Leclerc and I’m an independent driver for Ferrari. My name is Toto Wolff and I’m the independent team principal of Mercedes.

          Whoever pays you is your employer – independence is a relative term…

  21. And there STILL is no description of the allegation. Why?

    1. Because it’s none of your business?

      1. Considering the public nature of F1, I think people have a right to know the allegations.

        1. Of course you do…

          1. I swear some of you will defend anything here just to be obstinate and difficult. How could anyone oppose transparency when a story has been made public like this?

          2. @jblank

            Because transparancy can hurt both the accuser and the accused & you have no right to it.

        2. As usual, you’re wrong. We don’t have any right to that information.

          1. Now ask if I gaf that you think I’m wrong?

        3. It isn’t in the public nature of F1…

          The rights of the individuals, as afforded in law, means they have the right to privacy.

          The Data Protection Act and GDPR protections have been applicable for a while, how do people not understand them?

    2. … because when someone makes a private complaint you can’t have the risk of it getting made public. It exposes the complainant.

      1. Not necessarily. If they just said there was an allegation “X” and leave it at that, I think that would be enough. It’s the vague and clandestine nature of this that makes people suspect some type of cover up.

        1. So basically, you want the allegation to be made public, so you can class Horner guilty of it even though he has been exonerated.

          1. No dummy, he’s already been cleared. I just think since we know there was an allegation and it made it into the public realm, that it makes sense to let us know what it was. He’s good to go so there should be no issue with releasing it.

            In this age of Snowden and Assange and a general push towards transparency in society, I find it curious that so many of you seem to be perfectly fine with allowing this to be pushed into file 86. I guess unlike here in the US, Europeans just seem content to not seek information.

        2. @jblank

          What would releasing such details achieve? You suggest that not releasing them may be interpreted as a cover up, however how does the potential of a cover up change in likelihood whether the details of the accusation are made public or not?

          I am as curious to know as I am sure most are, but I certainly do not see any reason to believe that I ‘should’ know.

  22. Nice to see that the usual preachers and conspiracy theorists are out in force. Gives the rest of us a laugh.

    Nobody owes anyone here any further explanation, sad that some think they do.

    1. Could you be more of a kiss ass?

      1. Gives the rest of us a laugh.


      2. I don’t understand why you and so many others can’t grasp the simple concept of privacy. You don’t need nor have the right to know what Christian was accused of. And nothing good would come from Red Bull revealing that information.

        You have to remember, defamation is a thing. If Red Bull now comes out and publishes what he was accused of (after they themselves have proven Horner innocent), they would be opening themselves up to legal issues. Christian has been cleared in the eyes of his employer, and yet, despite this, they have allowed the accuser the right to appeal, which would suggest they are very confident in their investigation.

  23. Once Horner appeared on stage at the car launch, it seemed like his job would be safe. Other than the news of Hamilton moving to Ferrari, the allegations against Horner were the big story. It was not something that Red Bull could hide from, yet they put Horner in front of the cameras and the media. He wasn’t put on leave, or made unavailable while the investigation was active. And this was after Red Bull had seen the allegations and decided to have an inquiry. Maybe the investigation was Red Bull’s way of having someone else dismiss the allegations, rather than have the optics of not taking the allegations seriously and protecting Horner.

  24. couple of comments from ‘sources’ point towards a disgruntled female employee who was fired. what better timing could there have been to manipulate a wrongful termination suit ?

  25. So the investigation was going nowhere and Ford was about to pull the plug, when the independent investigator, Scooby-Doo, removed the wig from the stricken tea lady to reveal all 6’5″ of Toto Wolff underneath. You read it hear first, folks!

  26. I hope it will not get as rediculous as the whole 2021 comments we had now for years. Done, get on.

  27. The issue was not handled properly. The fact that he was not put on leave and continued to go to the Red Bull F1 HQ where the complainant still worked and was not told to stay away from the debut of the new car and the first race – does imply that the outcome was never in doubt!

  28. I kinda feel a bit like Ford.. The whole thing was as transparent as a brick..

  29. The only thing strange about this was the fact that it became public.
    Large companies HR departments have internal investigations pretty much all the time, and a lot end up coming to nothing just like this one.
    I’d be surprised indeed if some of the other teams haven’t had to deal with similar things over the years but have been fortunate enough not to have had it leaked to the press.
    The really unfortunate part about this is that it’s unlikely to go away any time soon, and most likely won’t go away at all until someone else high profile becomes the subject of an investigation. That the way it is these days with social media and the media, so we’ll now be subjected to daily articles about it for the next few months at least.

    1. I’d be surprised indeed if some of the other teams haven’t had to deal with similar things over the years but have been fortunate enough not to have had it leaked to the press.

      Not quite similar unless it was their senior leadership/team principal who was the accused. Had it been anyone lower in the corporation it would not have made any news.

Comments are closed.