“Attempts to find an amicable resolution have been unsuccessful, leaving Mr Massa with no choice but to initiate legal proceedings,” said Vieira Rezende, one of legal firms involved in the claim, in a statement.
“Mr Massa is seeking declarations that the FIA breached its regulations by failing to promptly investigate Nelson Piquet Jr’s crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, and that had it acted properly, Mr Massa would have won the drivers’ championship that year. Mr Massa also seeks damages for the significant financial loss he has suffered due to the FIA’s failure, in which Mr Ecclestone and FOM were also complicit.”
The dry legal language masks the radical nature of the case. Never before has an F1 world championship result been overturned 16 years after the race, nor a race result been annulled. Sporting regulations have not been tested in civil courts, and neither have they had to rule on the value of winning a Formula 1 World Championship.
Documents filed in the High Court and seen by Motor Sport reveal that the case leans on both British and French contract law, alleging breach of contract and a conspiracy to deny Massa the title. But these are the hurdles that Massa’s lawyers believe they can scale.
Here’s the full story of the case so far.
How much is Massa claiming?
Massa’s claim includes a list of losses and damages said to have been caused by failing to win the 2008 championship, totalling £64m.
This includes a €2m (£1.7m) bonus that he would have received from Ferrari for winning the drivers’ championship.
The rest is made up of: “The difference between the salary Mr Massa earned for the remainder of his career in Formula 1 and the salary that Mr Massa would have negotiated and received as Formula 1 champion” as well as additional sponsorship and commercial opportunities that Massa would have received as F1 champion.
Lawyers have asked for interest to be added to these damages as well.
In addition, Massa has asked for a declaration that the FIA breached its regulations by “failing to investigate the circumstances of the crash promptly in 2008”.
He is also seeking: “A declaration that if the FIA had not acted in breach of its own regulations, it would have cancelled or adjusted the results of the Singapore Grand Prix with the consequence that Mr Massa would have won the Drivers’ Championship in 2008.”
How Massa lost the 2008 championship
The 2008 Formula 1 season came with a Hollywood ending, as Massa was pipped to the title in front of his home crowd after Hamilton’s last-gasp overtake.
But it’s arguable it should never have happened. Three races earlier, he had been leading the Singapore Grand Prix when Nelson Piquet Jr deliberately crashed his Renault, which predictably brought out the safety car.
It was timed to benefit his team-mate Fernando Alonso who duly went on to win the race but also led to most of the grid heading into the pits at the same time to change tyres and refuel. In the rush, Massa was given the green light to leave with his fuel hose still attached. He rejoined the race last and finished out of the points, while Hamilton was third.
Without that incident, Massa may well have gone on to win the race. Had the rest of the season progressed in the same way — a big if — he would then have become champion.
But the Crashgate scandal unravelled too late. Although there were instant suspicions that Piquet’s crash was too convenient, it wasn’t until the following year that the story became public when Piquet confessed in a rift with Renault.
The team and senior officials were penalised but the 2008 results were left untouched, in line with regulations from racing’s governing body, the FIA. Teams have two weeks to appeal results and — in any case — lose the right to appeal results four days before that season’s end-of-year prizegiving ceremony.
Bernie Ecclestone’s comments that sparked Massa’s legal case
Until March last year, Felipe Massa had accepted his fate of finishing as the unfortunate runner-up in the 2008 world championship. And then Bernie Ecclestone changed the narrative.
As part of a series of interviews promoting a documentary about him, he was asked about Crashgate by the F1-Insider website. “Max Mosley [the late FIA president] and I were informed about what had happened in the race in Singapore during the 2008 season,” said Ecclestone.
“Piquet Jr had told his father Nelson [the three-time F1 champion] that he had been asked by the team to deliberately drive into the wall at a certain time in order to trigger a safety car phase and so on to help his teammate Alonso. Piquet Jr was worried about his contract extension, so he was under a lot of pressure and agreed.”
Then came the critical phrase: “We decided not to do anything for now.”
Ecclestone went on to say that he and Mosley wanted to “protect the sport and save it from a huge scandal”.
“We had enough information in time to investigate the matter. According to the statutes, we would probably have had to cancel the race in Singapore under these conditions.”
Had the race result been annulled, Massa would have ended the season with the same 97 points, but Hamilton would have lost the six he earned for his third-place finish. He would have ended the season with 92 points.
Will Bernie Ecclestone give evidence?
Since his March interview, Ecclestone has claimed that he doesn’t remember what he said, which may well affect whether the 93-year-old will give evidence in the case.
But it’s too late to derail the legal action: his earlier comments exposed a loose thread. Massa’s legal team is now pulling that thread. What unravels may change F1 history forever.