Christian Horner

Red Bull dismisses appeal of Horner investigation outcome

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

The Red Bull organisation has dismissed an appeal against the outcome of an internal investigation into the conduct of its F1 team principal Christian Horner.

Following complaints against Horner at the beginning of the year raised by a member of team staff, an independent inquiry was launched by Red Bull Austria, the parent company of the F1 team.

Horner, who has been team principal of Red Bull since they joined Formula 1 in 2005, denied all allegations made against him. The independent inquiry eventually dismissed the complaints against Horner at the conclusion of the investigation.

After the complainant exercised their right of appeal, Red Bull appointed a separate independent body to conduct the appeal into the outcome of the investigation. In a statement, Red Bull have announced the complainant’s appeal has also been dismissed.

“Earlier this year a complaint raised against Christian Horner was investigated,” Red Bull said a statement shared to RaceFans. “That complaint was dealt with through the company’s grievance procedure by the appointment of an independent KC [King’s Counsel] who dismissed the grievance.

“The complainant exercised the right to appeal and the appeal was carried out by another independent KC. All stages of the appeal process have now been concluded, with the final outcome that the appeal is not being upheld.

“The KC’s conclusions have been accepted and adopted by Red Bull. The internal process has concluded. The company respects the privacy of all its employees and will not be making further public comment on this matter at this time.

“Red Bull is committed to continuing to meet the highest workplace standards.”

The complainant was reportedly suspended with pay following the conclusion of the initial investigation into Horner. Red Bull has not commented on the employment status of the individual whose complaint prompted the investigation.

Reigning Formula 1 world champions Red Bull currently sit on top of the constructors’ championship during the summer break with 408 points, 42 ahead of McLaren. Three-times world champion Max Verstappen leads the drivers’ standings after 14 of the 24 rounds.

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.

52 comments on “Red Bull dismisses appeal of Horner investigation outcome”

  1. Completing this appeal process took quite a while.

    1. “As expected”, most probably…

      1. No, just surprising, although the same story with many other types of matters in the world.

      2. Haha, I see what you did there Simon! Nice jibe!

  2. Bad smells linger.

    1. That’s the stench of death.

    2. isthatglock21
      11th August 2024, 18:58

      So basically both the guys paid by Redbull to review their own internal investigation/procesess have agreed with each other? Hardly independent. Where the oversight of said QC’s & investigations? They’re really hiding behind the ‘indepedent’ & ‘QC’ label like barristers aren’t literally guns for hire in the corporate world. You don’t get to this status without being a corporate stamp licker. Lastly, everyone knows the reps/views of QC’s their hiring, basically like handpicking a jury beforehand. Not hard in 2024 to pick out old school blokes who all share the same views when it comes to workplace issues between senior execs & juniors. The UK never really had a ‘MeToo’ moment like the yanks did. Hence why Liberty/Zak Brown etc all took this more seriously. Whilst we in the UK are stuck in the past where the hypothetical of ‘imagine if that was your daughter’ has little impact on the old boys club. We’re truly going backwards.

      1. What exactly would an independent investigation look like to you? How do you propose to secure the services of someone with the expertise to oversee such a matter without someone paying for them? It is not as if someone else is going to pay.

        This wasn’t Red Bull investigating it’s own conduct, it wasn’t Red Bull employing to a KC to represent them, it was Red Bull employing a KC to investigate a matter between two employees. You are intentionally misrepresenting just exactly what King’s Counsel/Queen’s Counsel means, disrepecting highly professional individuals because you don’t want to accept the outcome.

        JUST TO BE CLEAR. Red Bull did not hire a KC to represent them. They hired a KC to oversee the matter on their behalf. They hired two different KCs at great expense to deal with the matter, people who are distinguished in law. They have taken the matter seriously from the outset. They didn’t hire some ambulance chasing lawyer to sweep it under a rug as some have believed from day 1.

        Those who don’t want to accept the outcome of Red Bull’s incredibly thorough processes to deal with the matter made up their mind based on the accussation alone, and won’t accept anything else. Every Red Bull senior executive, both in Austria, Thailand & Milton Keynes, the Red Bull legal & HR department, the two King Counsel’s are all crooked and covering it up, apparently. It is all one massive conspiracy theory to these people.

  3. Can anyone in the UK chime in on how independent a King’s Council is? My cursory reading is that they are just experienced lawyers. In the US, Red Bull would just hire the same firm over and over again for this kind of internal investigation or at best select from a very small group they trust to come to the ‘right’ conclusion. They might not technically work for Red Bull, but they know where their bread is buttered. Is this any better in the UK?

    To be clear, my position is that if someone is being paid by a company to investigate alleged wrongdoing by that company, their conclusions are not very trustworthy.

    1. they probably reached the right conclusion. If this person was indeed courting the favor of Verstappen the elder, then she was most likely playing her own games inside that organization, and as such, does not deserve to be employed in that capacity. Most of this drama is probably being drummed up by interests closer to Mercedes or McLaren. But it doesn’t matter, it should have always been behind closed doors, because no laws were broken. Just people playing those games that end up hurting other people in the end in order to favor themselves, and this kind of stuff really should not have got any attention.

    2. Cameron, don’t quote me, I am not a lawyer, but as I understand it, in England and Wales, a solicitor is a someone you go to when you want them to draw up a contract, someone who comes to the police station to give you legal advice when you get arrested, etc, and a barrister is someone who is qualified to represent you in court, (or act as the prosecutor). I think the US refers to barristers as attorneys.

      KCs are a sort of senior barrister, they have to have at least 10 years experience of being a barrister, demonstrate a very good knowledge of their field of law, and have to be approved by a selection committee etc. I think there is somewhere between 1000 and 2000 KCs in England and Wales. However, I don’t know of anything that says a KC has to be any more impartial than any other lawyer. All lawyers in the UK are supposed to have integrity, must not mislead or withhold information, and have to abide by a code of conduct. I think Red Bull’s statement makes frequent references to the KC because it makes it sound prestigious and more authoritative, but still this was an internal process, not an independent hearing in a court of law. So call me cynical but like you, I have reservations.

      1. Not a court of law, but conducted with a view to having to defend the decision in court. And willingly requested and submitted to by the claimant.

        I know we dont like Horner, or Red Bull, but honestly the allegations just stink of attempts to derail Res Bull. And unfortunately in this culture we live in, the one posing as the victim is assumed right and honest regardless of truth.

      2. It can be viewed in many ways – whilst some might take the view that they might be encouraged to return the view that the people paying them want to hear, it could also be pointed out that, if they were found to have behaved improperly, it could be rather damaging to their reputation and hurt their future career prospects.

        It also depends what exactly they were asked to review, as that also seems to shape how people are portraying this case.

        The reports indicate that the review was into whether the team had applied their own internal policies correctly when investigating the claims raised against Horner. As far as I know, they were not being asked to judge whether the conclusions were correct, but whether they believed that the internal investigation followed the correct procedures.

        In that regard, the final outcome is technically not relevant – it’s whether the right process was undertaken to reach that outcome that they were asked to review. Whether you believe that outcome was the right result is another matter.

    3. To my understanding, these results are simply an advisory for the company on how to proceed, and can be used to build a case if the defendant ever decided to take it to a proper court-of-law. The problem is that many people aren’t aware that the rules inside a company/corporation don’t actually trump state law, and they just accept it. Plus, I couldn’t imagine a private individual having much chance taking on the Red Bull legal team. Not really fair, but as long as public opinion is generally in favor of selling off personal rights to big business, not much to be done.

    4. Any barrister will be contracted and appointed by Red Bull but if it got out that they were asked to fix or lie about a case, they would be discredited and potentially disbarred, which means they can’t practice their trade anymore.

      KC’s are barristers with 15+ years experience in a field and are appointed to the role by a fully independent selection panel, who look at every application and judge accordingly. There is no political influence (the Lord Chancellor is required to accept the panel’s judgement, regardless of political ideology) and the monarch simply rubberstamps it.

      As a result of the checks and balances, i’d say most KCs will be trustworthy people. That Red Bull contracted two independent KCs and both agreed, says that their case was fairly watertight.

      1. As a result of the checks and balances, i’d say most KCs will be trustworthy people.

        The one I know is, call me biased, he’s a friend.
        TBH, I’ve known him for years and the subject of his work never came up, until we had need of the letters after his name.

        That Red Bull contracted two independent KCs and both agreed, says that their case was fairly watertight.

        1. You don’t know they agreed with each other, although any sound advice would likely have been similar.
        2. You don’t know what they presented to the Red Bull board.
        3. You don’t even know if the KC advice was in agreement with the RBR statement presented to the public – and never will.

        The most likely advice would be to ensure proper procedures are put in place to limit the likelihood of a repeat situation leading to another accusation.

  4. I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise.

  5. Everyone is being highly cynical about this, but there is zero guarantee this woman is acting without an ulterior motive or ever had a good case. While I find Horner having an affair distasteful, let’s also remember this woman knew he was married and chose to engage in one with him anyway. So, neither party really has any moral high ground here.

    1. It always looked to me like it was orchestrated by Horner’s enemies from the beginning.
      Of course his own part in this affair is embarrassing for him. But the real shebang are the people who put her up to it.

      1. Yeah the whole “leak” and email with screenshots thing just stinks of “set up” to me.

        1. and the media talking about how she felt isolated and afraid. Yeah, they wouldn’t be touching this stuff with a 10 foot pole unless someone like Toto or an org like Liberty were giving the nod.

    2. This is a false sense of equivalence.

      Sure, she knew he was married. His current wife knew that when she started having an affair with him, too. We can judge that if we want, but that’d just be it: an opinion.

      The point is, he didn’t stop when she asked him to. That’s where it becomes a problem.

      1. Thats an allegation, not proof of…

        1. As far as affairs go, this was pretty dull. But the leaked chats are pretty clear about what happened.

          Horner bring sleazy was already well established, though, and apparently Red Bull isn’t too interested. That’s fair so long as nothing outright illegal happened.

  6. Whilst I am rather over this, I cant help but question the Red Bull statement suggesting:-

    “Red Bull is committed to continuing to meet the highest workplace standards.”

    Yet I have not seen any confirmation that Horner did not send the alleged texts (If anyone can advise otherwise I’d be interested to know). Potentially he didn’t. Or potentially he did but the full in the full context of what happened it was considered insufficient to be a ‘case’.

    However if it were the latter, regardless of there being a case to pursue, I hardly consider this to be the “highest workplace standards”.

    1. You are entirely correct in questioning this. Money has talked. That is all.

      1. No it seems you don’t understand or coming from the US a KC decision is 1 step below court the KC decision must be so that if went to court he can defend his decision and is in the right.
        Those affairs aren’t things to bring to court that is why they have KC in Great Brittain.

        As @cairnsfella demands things he shouldn’t demand as he has no right to have in the first place as that is private…..

        1. @macleod Perhaps I am misinterpreting you, but I am not demanding anything. I am merely stating that Red Bulls alledged “comitment” seems potentially at odds with it’s actual behaviour.

          1. @cairnsfella Then i have misunderstood you and you can ignore my remark. Thank you for explaining.

    2. @cairnsfella RB using woolly language like ‘we are committed to’ is a get out. Every company has issues with HR and meeting employment standards is a constantly moving feast. Red Bull are effectively saying ‘we aim to hit these standards as often as possible’, as it basically admits bad things occassionally happen.

    3. However if it were the latter, regardless of there being a case to pursue, I hardly consider this to be the “highest workplace standards”.

      It’s probably the highest Horner can achieve.

  7. I wrote a fictional medieval story about a coup… where a seed was planted by a person who wishes to overthrow King “Morner”. “Moss the Cracken” was the mastermind. This person had form for controlling women and always getting way, usually by emotional coercion or threats of violence. Allegedly he once ran down a damsel with his stagecoach… allegedly… Good story.

    1. Joss isn’t German, but he would like to do business with one of them I am sure …

      But hey, ruining red bull and stealing Flax Mercsteppen was never in the cards was it.

      1. The boy who cried wolff.

    2. I wrote a fictional medieval story about a coup…

      It looks like you have a career, shelf stacking.

  8. Of course. The globalists always win. Look at the sates of the world if you have the stomach for it. Not everyone does these days. Why does F1 race in some of the worst places in the world?

    1. What has globalism got to do with anything? I’m pretty sure if you pry under the surface of any organisation or government, whether they’re ‘globalist’ or ‘isolationalist’, you’ll still find human beings (unfortunately) being human beings – i.e. ghastly and awful to each other whilst getting away with it.

    2. You want to being in some Covid vaccines, WEF and Bilderberg group into the discussion too while you’re at it?

      1. Well, don’t forget the Illuminati……

    3. someone or something
      9th August 2024, 13:49

      Using the word ‘globalist’ unironically is tantamount to testing negative for IQ.

      1. The “globalists” = just another spin on “the deep state” or modern equivalent of hippies blaming “the man” for everything. “I can’t get a job reeking of pot and dressed in Birkenstocks because the man, man!”

    4. “public relations” and “the engineering of consent.” Two good reads. Adam Curtis has some kick butt documentaries concerning the middle of the last century.

      globalism is pretty real guys, so are shady people who exploit the masses for their own ends. There are sick people on top of the pyramid scheme as well on the bottom, its just easier to blame ‘the losers’.

  9. I’ve never seen such an over blown storyline.
    They were both guilty – it’s between them and their spouses and that should the end of it.
    How in hell did this negatively affect anyone at RBR? A bunch of self righteous snowflakes no doubt.
    Toto and Zak did all they could to bring Horner down which didn’t happen but they did manage to break up RBR so congrats.
    It’s obvious she is a gold digger but doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Perhaps she can sue Jos now and get some $.
    Let it go already.

    1. I’ve never seen such an over blown storyline.
      They were both guilty – it’s between them and their spouses and that should the end of it

      I agree utterly.

    2. A world famous powerful executive has an affair with an underling, and you assume she is a gold digger, even after dickpics? You have no idea how the world works, and your “snowflake” dog whistle shows it. Horner is a creeping creep who got caught creeping. Not professional conduct, and certainly the reason a real man like Newey left was to distance himself from this kind of corporate culture. I agree it has been overblown in the media. Horner should have been canned quietly, and that would have been the end of it.

  10. This whole thing should not have gotten any attention in the first place. But it was too hard to resist for the Media & non likers who wanted to see damage so desperately. Text book definition of bad sportsmanship.

    1. Text book definition of bad sportsmanship

      I think it’s a textbook example.
      Of how money and power are abused. Sport had no connection with this purely RBR internal event.
      Don’t blame the media for reporting an item where no one had to make anything up for it to be salacious.

      Totally not surprised that the company have swept it all under the carpet.

      1. Reporting it and milking it to serve an agenda are two different things.

        1. As ferrox-glideh put it: “Horner should have been canned quietly, and that would have been the end of it.”
          Move in a different TP and let AN continue designing cars MV can win with.

          Alternately, you bring in a KC to examine the evidence and advise the board on a ranked set of response mechanisms and the likelihood of the complainant’s success in court, should it go that far.

          1. Why would you ever can someone based on rumours. Would be quite unethical

  11. isthatglock21
    11th August 2024, 19:00

    Nothing to see here folks, move along! The two chaps paid by Redbull said so!

Comments are closed.