Pierre Gasly of Alpine saw his podium finish from the June Monaco Grand Prix erased for a second time after the penalties originally applied to him were reinstated following a successful appeal by McLaren and Red Bull. The reversal means that Red Bull’s Isack Hadjar is once again classified in third place, while McLaren’s Oscar Piastri moves back into fourth.
Gasly is now listed seventh, with Racing Bulls teammates Liam Lawson and Arvid Lindblad occupying the fifth and sixth slots respectively. The Monaco race on June 7 was won by Mercedes driver Kimi Antonelli, with Ferrari’s Lewis Hamilton finishing second. Gasly had crossed the line in third position on track, but two five‑second penalties for alleged pit‑lane speeding were applied immediately after the chequered flag, dropping him down the order. The provisional top ten after the initial penalties read as follows: 1) Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes), 2) Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari), 3) Isack Hadjar (Red Bull), 4) Oscar Piastri (McLaren), 5) Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls), 6) Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls), 7) Pierre Gasly (Alpine), 8) Alex Albon (Williams), 9) Esteban Ocon (Haas), 10) Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin).
Drivers shown in bold had their positions altered after the International Court of Appeal (ICA) issued its verdict on September 4. Alpine initially won a right‑of‑review case five days after the race, arguing that the stewards had miscalculated the distance in the pit lane and that Gasly had not actually exceeded the speed limit. The FIA stewards accepted this new evidence as a "significant and relevant new element" and reinstated Gasly to third place. McLaren and Red Bull, however, lodged an appeal against Alpine’s successful review.
The appeal was heard by the FIA International Court of Appeal in Paris on August 25. The court ultimately decided to overturn Alpine’s decision, reinstating the original penalties and confirming Gasly’s demotion to seventh. It is worth noting that other drivers – Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes’ George Russell (who had his own penalty later converted to a drive‑through) and Oscar Piastri – were also flagged for the same pit‑lane speeding breach.
Because those drivers had already served their penalties during the race, the court could not retroactively remove them. Following the ICA ruling, the FIA released a statement explaining that it would review the timing system and related regulations, as well as the procedural aspects of the right‑of‑review and appeal mechanisms. The governing body emphasized its support for the stewarding process, noting that stewards operate in a different environment from the court, which has access to extensive legal counsel, arguments, and additional evidence.
The FIA also highlighted its commitment to continuous improvement through professional development for stewards and regular scrutiny of ICA decisions. Alpine issued a brief statement expressing disappointment and frustration with the outcome. The team reiterated its belief that Gasly had not exceeded the pit‑lane speed limit at any point, but it also acknowledged the court’s decision.
Alpine stressed that, despite the setback, the team remains focused on improving performance and staying competitive in the championship battle. The decision has significant championship implications. Alpine, which had been only three points behind Racing Bulls for fifth place in the Constructors' Championship, now finds itself 16 points adrift after losing the three points associated with a podium finish.
Conversely, Red Bull welcomed the reinstatement of Hadjar’s third‑place result, which adds three points to both the driver’s and the team’s season totals. Team principal Laurent Mekies said the ruling was important not only for Isack but also for the sport as a whole, arguing that consistency in enforcing speed‑limit penalties is essential for fair competition. Mekies added, "We don’t want to finish a race and then spend the next few days questioning whether the speed‑limit check was correct. Some cars complied, some didn’t, and it’s vital that the rules are applied uniformly." Looking ahead, Formula 1 moves to Monza for the Italian Grand Prix, Ferrari’s home race, where the championship will continue to unfold.
Fans can follow the action live on Sky Sports F1 or stream via NOW with a flexible, no‑contract subscription. The broader context of this dispute highlights the increasing complexity of modern Formula 1 governance. As cars become faster and data‑rich, the precision of timing systems and the clarity of regulatory language become ever more critical. The FIA’s commitment to reviewing its timing methodology suggests that future races may see enhanced monitoring technology, potentially reducing the likelihood of similar controversies.
In addition, the appeal process itself has come under scrutiny. Critics argue that the right‑of‑review and ICA mechanisms can create prolonged uncertainty for teams and drivers, affecting strategic decisions and championship narratives.
Proponents, however, contend that these legal avenues are essential safeguards that ensure fairness and transparency when stewards’ decisions are contested. For Alpine, the loss of a podium is a tangible blow to morale and points, but the team’s statement indicates a resolve to keep pushing forward.
Their focus will likely shift to optimizing car performance, pit‑stop efficiency, and race strategy to claw back lost ground in the tightly contested midfield battle. Red Bull, on the other hand, gains a morale boost from Hadjar’s restored podium. While the team’s lead driver remains Max Verstappen, the success of a junior driver like Hadjar underscores the depth of talent within the Red Bull Junior Team and reinforces the organization’s long‑term development pipeline.
Overall, the Monaco incident serves as a reminder that in Formula 1, victories are not only won on the track but also in the courts and regulatory chambers that oversee the sport. The balance between swift, decisive stewarding and thorough, fair appeals will continue to shape the competitive landscape as the season progresses.