McLaren boss explains 'double intent' behind FIA hearing into Monaco penalty decisions

McLaren team principal Andrea Stella has explained the 'double intent' of an FIA International Court Hearing in Paris.

The Monaco Grand Prix proved to be highly controversial, as numerous drivers were penalised for speeding in the pit lane, only for it later to be confirmed that the measure used to verify such violations was out by 77cm, meaning that these sanctions had been incorrectly awarded. 

This evidence was presented by Alpine as being 'new, significant, and relevant' in its appeal, and was accepted by the stewards as such. As a result, Gasly's penalty was rescinded, as detailed in decisions one and two of document 99 from the Monaco weekend.

The outcome caused controversy, as Alpine was only able to appeal as Gasly had not served his penalty during the race, and had instead seen five seconds added to his race time, while numerous other drivers had taken an in-race hit. As there is no function in the regulations that would enable those drivers to have their penalties withdrawn, even with the evidence proving they had been incorrectly awarded, this caused significant paddock debate. 

With the decision Red Bull's Isack Hadjar, McLaren's Oscar Piastri, and Racing Bulls team-mates Liam Lawson and Arvid Lindblad were forced down the order by a position.

Whilst Mercedes initially considered taking legal action over the result, it ultimately elected not to follow Red Bull and McLaren.

 Speaking after the Dutch Grand Prix, Stella said: "We go to the hearing at the International Court of Appeal with, if you want, a double intent. 

"The first intent is more general than the interest of McLaren. We think that the process that happened after the race in Monaco is a process that needs to be reviewed, because of fairness for all competitors. 

"The fact that the penalty was removed introduces some significant elements of concern, and we would like to take the opportunity of the International Court of Appeal for a clarification of this aspect.

"There's obviously more related to this case; you can go into the technical aspects of how the pit limiter was calculated, but for me, a high level is more the fairness and the principle that needs to be clarified, and possibly reinstated, because I think what happened sets some significant concerns.

"The second aspect is the interest of McLaren ourselves. We not only get this level of concern, but we also got materially penalised for having served a penalty that is not appealable, and this even cost us points in the championship. 

"So there's, I think, a general interest for Formula 1 and the sport and the integrity of the sport, and there's a material interest for McLaren in terms of our championship impact. So these are the two points of view, the two perspectives that we would like to pursue and seek clarification for in the coming International Court of Appeal."