Flavio Wins Appeal

mickey29 · 5 Jan 2010, 14:28 (Ref:2608433)

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80743

csirl · 5 Jan 2010, 14:33 (Ref:2608436)

This was expected - you could drive a double decker bus through the legal deficiencies of the ban.

ensign14 · 5 Jan 2010, 14:42 (Ref:2608439)

Even so, the French courts do not often take action in what are essentially arbitrations, on the basis that the parties have agreed to a less than comprehensive procedure in exchange for a quick decision. The detail of the decision will be interesting. Will it have repercussions for the FIA's disciplinary procedures?

chillibowl · 5 Jan 2010, 14:56 (Ref:2608445)

whats "irregular" about a sporting body banning someone for life for successfully conspiring to fix a race/match? i though this was the most normal thing in the world.

what a joke!

Marbot · 5 Jan 2010, 14:56 (Ref:2608446)

Oh dear. The man who brought you 'sleaze' into the world of F1 'gets off' yet again. If there was anyone more single-minded about the way he ran 'his' F1 team, then I have yet to see him. It will be a sad day if Briatore finds his way back into running another F1 team again.

On the same day, however....

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80738

ensign14 · 5 Jan 2010, 15:26 (Ref:2608453)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chillibowl

whats "irregular" about a sporting body banning someone for life for successfully conspiring to fix a race/match? i though this was the most normal thing in the world.

what a joke!

If you do it without hearing their side of the story. Briatore did not take part in the proceedings, saying that the FIA had no jurisdiction over him (I think). Briatore MIGHT be 100% innocent and the whole thing cooked up by Symonds and the bratlet. Or it might have been a total vendetta by the FIA who acted as judge, jury and executioner. Justice must not solely be done, it must also be seen to be done.

The real culprit here is the show car. Without that, this sort of thing would not have happened. Why is it OK for the FIA to fix the races, but not a team?

cptkablamo · 5 Jan 2010, 15:33 (Ref:2608455)

Doesn't matter if he is guilty or not, if he is found guilty under a flawed hearing, it will always be overturned on appeal...

I ultimately don't have an issue with this, but do think it is a shame that McLaren and Ron Dennis never got this chance.

BluSTi · 5 Jan 2010, 15:37 (Ref:2608459)

Ron Dennis needs the ban. What a douchebag.

ascarracinguk · 5 Jan 2010, 15:46 (Ref:2608461)

why does ron dennis need banning? what did he do wrong??

Alan Raine · 5 Jan 2010, 15:48 (Ref:2608462)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluSTi

Ron Dennis needs the ban. What a douchebag.

Huh????

I'd trust Ron Dennis more than Flav

Ron thinks he was hard done by and a lot of people, including me, agree with him.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80727

neilwaynesmith · 5 Jan 2010, 15:48 (Ref:2608463)

Money talks, and sets a dangerous precedent....

What this court is effectively saying is; "It doesn't matter that you enter into a sport, thereby agreeing to be governed by it's rules. Because if you break those rules, you can always throw money at the courts to change the rules from the outside.

In other words, given enough cash, cheats CAN prosper.

chris bailey · 5 Jan 2010, 15:49 (Ref:2608464)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluSTi

Ron Dennis needs the ban. What a douchebag.

Pardon!!? He might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I'd take him over the Italian "Gentleman" any day. For those with short memories, Ron came up the hard way and rebuilt McLaren from the hopeless mess it had become under the previous regime. Ok, so Ron-speak can make you chuckle, but there's no doubting his integrity, even if it's not always presented in a self-flattering light. Briatore, on the other hand, is a particularly unpleasant individual for whom the term "self-serving" might well have been invented.

chillibowl · 5 Jan 2010, 16:18 (Ref:2608474)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensign14

Justice must not solely be done, it must also be seen to be done.

well i guess thats the joke then. The FIA are incapable of governing and the entire handling of all future motorsports proceedings should be dealt with by the all seeing French courts.

but seriously, what we got was something else entirely where "irregular" was a more important consideration than "innocence" and the message is cheating in F1 is not that bad especially when you get caught and thats not justice either.

strider · 5 Jan 2010, 16:36 (Ref:2608483)

I know of one person who will not be happy with the decision. He said so yesterday before it was known. Link.

Marbot · 5 Jan 2010, 16:42 (Ref:2608485)

I'd be interested to know who Flavio is now inviting to his "big party" ?

p261brm · 5 Jan 2010, 16:46 (Ref:2608487)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensign14

The real culprit here is the show car. Without that, this sort of thing would not have happened. Why is it OK for the FIA to fix the races, but not a team?

Mmmmm....to a point, a severe case of not what you know, but who perhaps? Like a good

it still stinks in my book.

Last2LiftOff · 5 Jan 2010, 16:49 (Ref:2608489)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensign14

The detail of the decision will be interesting.

Really Ensign, we don't know nothin' yet.

csirl · 5 Jan 2010, 16:58 (Ref:2608492)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chillibowl

whats "irregular" about a sporting body banning someone for life for successfully conspiring to fix a race/match? i though this was the most normal thing in the world.

what a joke!

I dont think the court is saying that he is not guilty of what he is accussed. Its more a case of proper procedures were not followed by the FIA. The full judgement text will tell us what exactly was not done correctly, but it could be any or mulitples of the following.

1. Accussed not given details of the evidence against him in advance of the hearing.
2. Accussed not present for the entire hearing.
3. Accussed not allowed to question witnesses.
4. Accussed not allowed to appeal the decision.
5. Accussed not allowed to continue in the sport pending an appeal hearing.
6. Accussed not allowed to go to Arbitration.
7. Those making the decision having a vested interest.
8. Accussed penalised on the basis of testimony by anonymous witnesses.
9. Paperwork not done correctly.
10. Accussed not told in advance of the FIA rule(s) broken.

It is very common for sports organisations to make mistakes on some or all of the above and consequently is very common for the courts to overturn bans or suspensions even if it appears that the suspensions may be appropriate.

The is one other important legal issue that stood out like a sore thumb in all of this to anyone with a good knowledge of sports law - the lifetime ban. A sports organisation I've done work for got some legal advice on lifetime bans when a individual did something seriously wrong. The legal advice said that under EU law, you cannot ban someone for life. You can suspend someone for a very long time e.g. 50 years, but not for life. The suspension must have a timeframe. You can prevent someone who isnt a member from joining for life (if you have rules in place which make people ineligible for membership if they've done certain things), but you cannot ban an existing member - can only suspend them. You'll need to find a good sports lawyer to explain the reasons for this, but they do exist.

I bet when the FIA hold the hearing again, that if he is guilty, he gets a suspension for a certain number of years rather than a ban.

VIVA GT · 5 Jan 2010, 17:06 (Ref:2608494)

Quote:

Originally Posted by csirl

I dont think the court is saying that he is not guilty of what he is accussed. Its more a case of proper procedures were not followed by the FIA. The full judgement text will tell us what exactly was not done correctly, but it could be any or mulitples of the following.

1. Accussed not given details of the evidence against him in advance of the hearing.
2. Accussed not present for the entire hearing.
3. Accussed not allowed to question witnesses.
4. Accussed not allowed to appeal the decision.
5. Accussed not allowed to continue in the sport pending an appeal hearing.
6. Accussed not allowed to go to Arbitration.
7. Those making the decision having a vested interest.
8. Accussed penalised on the basis of testimony by anonymous witnesses.
9. Paperwork not done correctly.
10. Accussed not told in advance of the FIA rule(s) broken.

It is very common for sports organisations to make mistakes on some or all of the above and consequently is very common for the courts to overturn bans or suspensions even if it appears that the suspensions may be appropriate.

The is one other important legal issue that stood out like a sore thumb in all of this to anyone with a good knowledge of sports law - the lifetime ban. A sports organisation I've done work for got some legal advice on lifetime bans when a individual did something seriously wrong. The legal advice said that under EU law, you cannot ban someone for life. You can suspend someone for a very long time e.g. 50 years, but not for life. The suspension must have a timeframe. You can prevent someone who isnt a member from joining for life (if you have rules in place which make people ineligible for membership if they've done certain things), but you cannot ban an existing member - can only suspend them. You'll need to find a good sports lawyer to explain the reasons for this, but they do exist.

I bet when the FIA hold the hearing again, that if he is guilty, he gets a suspension for a certain number of years rather than a ban.

But surely, Flavio took the decision himself not to be present at the hearing (saying something arrogant like "The FIA have no control over me!"), so that's why he couldn't question witnesses?

ensign14 · 5 Jan 2010, 17:19 (Ref:2608501)

Because he claimed the FIA had no jurisdiction over someone who was not involved in motor sport.

Ignoring proceedings is actually not an uncommon tactic; if someone sued me in the US, I would decline to take part, and only bother fighting when that someone tried to enforce the default judgment in the UK. The court might have said that, yes, the FIA has no jurisdiction over Briatore and therefore cannot ban him; the only way to do so would be to bring civil proceedings, for example.

csirl · 5 Jan 2010, 17:25 (Ref:2608502)

Quote:

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

But surely, Flavio took the decision himself not to be present at the hearing (saying something arrogant like "The FIA have no control over me!"), so that's why he couldn't question witnesses?

He could have a point. Are individual employees of F1 teams signed up members of the FIA who have paid a membership fee either directly to the FIA or to their national motorsports body ala any club racer? If not, then maybe he isnt a FIA member and so cannot be subject to FIA proceedings.

duke_toaster · 5 Jan 2010, 17:32 (Ref:2608503)

Supposedly the FIA want to appeal. To prevent things these things happen, I think the FIA need to look at what FIFA, The FA, The Premier League et al do and consider introducing Superlicences for owners and high up team personnel. IIRC similar things happen in other sports.

GolddustMini · 5 Jan 2010, 17:41 (Ref:2608504)

so does this mean that as far as the renault scandal everyone has got off with nothing but a little bit of tar and feathers?
renault didn't get fined, or kicked out, bar loosing their jobs (jumped or pushed?) flav and pat haven't been punished..... so that sets a good precedent doesn't it....

Marbot · 5 Jan 2010, 17:45 (Ref:2608508)

Why can't he be like Pat Symmonds and take his punishment like a man?

F1 teams take part in the 'FIA Formula One World Championship', so they'd better make sure that what they intend to do is entirely legal or face some consequences.

What we should remember here is that Briatore is effectively out of F1, and certainly no longer in charge of an F1 team. I've no doubt that some members of the FIAs legal department had already envisaged that Briatore would win an appeal, but it's job done as far as the FIA is concerned. Will he get back in again? Does anyone really need a Briatore any more?

Last2LiftOff · 5 Jan 2010, 18:01 (Ref:2608513)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

Why can't he be like Pat Symmonds and take his punishment like a man?

Well, I'd rather say he is Marbot, but that's just me.

And c'mon, I mean it doesn't get more serious for you then when the penalty's your livelihood. I reckon.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Flavio Camponeschi	JOWT Blog	Kart Racing	2	16 Nov 2008 15:51
F-off, Flavio!	Rambo	Formula One	9	21 Jul 2002 08:18
Flavio Briatore to take over Prost??	steve nielsen	Formula One	34	26 Nov 2001 08:57