Andrea Stella has leveled a serious accusation against Alpine’s senior figure Flavio Briatore, branding his remarks as an "insult" to McLaren after Briatore suggested that a judge on the FIA International Court of Appeal had a personal connection with the rival team. The controversy erupted after the appeal court announced on Friday that the penalties imposed on Alpine driver Pierre Gas‑ly during the Monaco Grand Prix in June would be reinstated, following a successful challenge by McLaren and Red Bull.
Gasly had crossed the finish line in third place, only to be demoted when two five‑second penalties for exceeding the pit‑lane speed limit were applied. Alpine exercised its right of review and managed to have those penalties withdrawn five days later, temporarily restoring Gasly to a podium finish. However, the appeal court’s decision to reinstate the sanctions pushed Gasly back to seventh in the official results.
The reshuffle elevated Red Bull’s Isack Hadjar to the final podium spot and lifted McLaren’s Oscar Piastri into fourth place. During the press conference at the Italian Grand Prix, which coincidentally featured Alpine’s executive adviser Flavio Briatore and McLaren’s team principal Andrea Stella, the two men found themselves in a heated exchange. Alpine released a brief statement shortly after the court’s ruling, expressing disappointment with the outcome while also acknowledging the panel’s decision from the hearing in Paris.
Briatore, however, adopted a markedly different tone a few hours later. He claimed that one of the four judges on the panel had a "working relationship" with McLaren, implying a conflict of interest that could have tainted the impartiality of the decision.
"It’s very unfair, first of all, but we accept the decision," he said, before adding that the third judge on the panel behaved more like a prosecutor than an independent arbiter. He pointed to a charity event in California in 2018 where the judge was photographed alongside a speech for McLaren, noting that two of the three McLaren cars were reportedly donated at that occasion. "We have a nice picture of this guy at the speech for McLaren in 2018," Briatore remarked, suggesting that the judge’s ties to the team were "quite unfair" and that the judge had been "very nasty" to Alpine’s representatives during the hearing. He hinted that Alpine was "thinking about" taking legal action over the perceived bias.
The International Court of Appeal responded on Saturday, acknowledging that public comments had questioned the independence and impartiality of its judges. The statement stressed that the appointment of judges follows FIA judicial procedures and the International Bar Association’s guidelines on conflicts of interest.
All judges are elected by the FIA General Assembly, often on the recommendation of at least five F1 teams, and they are required to disclose interests annually, sign declarations of independence for each case, and adhere to strict confidentiality rules. According to the ICA, both parties were invited to raise any concerns about the composition of the panel at the start and conclusion of the hearing, and no objections were lodged. The court highlighted the importance of having judges from diverse cultural and geographical backgrounds to ensure a balanced and credible process. It reaffirmed confidence in the integrity of the proceedings and the judges, and reiterated the FIA’s commitment to impartiality.
Sky Sports reported that McLaren maintains there is no connection between the team and the judge in question. Initially, Stella chose not to engage with Briatore’s allegations, but he later warned that any unfounded claims could lead to legal consequences.
"I find that this conference is moving in a direction that is quite insulting to McLaren and to the reputation of a team that deserves a lot of respect," Stella said. "If anyone makes these serious allegations, they will have to take responsibility for what they say in a public forum." Stella emphasized that the International Court of Appeal conducted the hearing to the highest standards and that questioning its integrity was unwarranted. He clarified that McLaren’s primary motive was not to gain two championship points for Oscar Piastri—who is not a contender for the title this season—but to seek clarity on the application of the sporting regulations. "We had concerns beyond the fact that we might have lost two points; those points probably won’t change anything," he explained.
"We were concerned about sporting equality and fairness, which is crucial for all teams, not just McLaren." He added that the hearing was attended by representatives from every team because the issue of rule interpretation and consistency affects the entire paddock. The case hinged on Alpine’s successful right‑of‑review claim, which introduced new evidence that the stewards had previously missed: an error in the calculation of the distance in the pit lane, proving that Gasly had not actually exceeded the speed limit.
Other drivers—Ferrari’s Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes’ George Russell (whose penalty was later converted into a drive‑through) and McLaren’s Piastri—had also received speeding penalties, but because they had already served their penalties during the race, those could not be reversed. The broader context of the weekend includes a packed schedule of support series: F3 sprint and feature races, F2 sprint and feature races, and the Porsche Supercup, all leading up to the main event at Monza, Ferrari’s home Grand Prix. The Italian Grand Prix will be broadcast live on Sky Sports F1, with streaming options available via NOW for viewers without a long‑term contract.
The ongoing dispute underscores the delicate balance between sporting justice, team politics, and the need for transparent, unbiased adjudication in Formula 1.