A bitter dispute has erupted between Alpine and McLaren in the lead-up to the Italian Grand Prix, with Alpine's executive adviser and de facto team principal Flavio Briatore levelling extraordinary allegations that an FIA court of appeal judge was biased towards McLaren when reversing a Monaco Grand Prix decision that had favoured his team.
On Friday morning, the International Court of Appeal released its ruling on challenges filed by McLaren and Red Bull against the stewards' revised classification from Monaco. The original dispute stemmed from an incorrectly measured pit-lane at the circuit, which had led to erroneous speeding penalties. Alpine had successfully appealed those penalties through a right-of-review process, resulting in Pierre Gasly being reinstated to third place. However, the appeal court reversed that decision, demoting Gasly to seventh and restoring Red Bull's Isack Hadjar to third and McLaren's Oscar Piastri to fourth.
The hearing had taken place on August 25 at FIA headquarters in Paris, conducted behind closed doors at the request of the parties involved. Judges took approximately two weeks to deliberate before publishing their written decision.
Briatore arrived at Friday's press conference in Monza armed with an A4 sheet of paper and, seated directly across from McLaren principal Andrea Stella, immediately attacked the judgment as compromised. He claimed one of the four appeal judges had undisclosed connections to McLaren that should have disqualified him from the panel.
We accept the decision but what is very strange was four judges in the panel. One of the judges act like a prosecutor. This is not a big problem. The problem is he's linked with the McLaren company, because we have a nice picture of this guy at a speech for McLaren in 2018 in MSO [McLaren Special Operations], Beverly Hills. He has a foundation, it's called the One Drop foundation and McLaren gave two, three McLaren cars. This was quite unfair. One of the judges was linked with a team which was protesting us.
Briatore went further, naming the judge directly as Filippo Marchino and accusing him of acting as a prosecutor during the hearing rather than maintaining judicial impartiality. He alleged Marchino's conduct became explicable only after Alpine discovered the judge's alleged ties to McLaren.
Stella responded with visible anger, describing Briatore's allegations as insulting to McLaren's reputation and warning of potential consequences for making such serious public accusations without substantiation.
I find that this conference is going in this direction, quite insulting for McLaren, for the reputation of a team that deserves a lot of respect. If anybody makes these kind of allegations, which seem quite serious, they are going to have to take responsibility for what they are saying in a public forum. The hearing, the whole international court of appeal was conducted to the highest standards, and we should not question this.
Stella cited Article 1.1.1 of the FIA's international sporting code, the regulatory framework under which both the original appeals and the court of appeal proceedings had been conducted.
Briatore countered by repeating his assertion about Marchino's alleged conflict of interest, insisting that judicial independence had been compromised.
It's very nice to talk about the point one, one, P2, three, P, P, P. But what is unfair is that the judge was linked with McLaren. This is unfair. The judge normally being completely independent and this judge, the name is Filippo Marchino. Filippo Marchino is a judge, he was very nasty during the hearing, was acting as a prosecutor. And after we found out what is the reason why so nasty, this guy. He is very linked with McLaren.
How are appeal judges selected?
The composition of the four-judge panel had been known six weeks in advance, allowing the parties involved an opportunity to lodge objections to any appointed members. The FIA subsequently issued a statement outlining its procedure for selecting candidates to the International Court of Appeal.
According to the FIA, an eligibility assessment committee reviews all candidates in accordance with FIA statutes. For each case, a judging panel is then constituted comprising at least three judges, with members appointed by the president of the International Court of Appeal. The FIA did not address Briatore's specific allegations about Marchino but stated that its procedures met the required standards.
What was the Monaco dispute about?
The original controversy centred on pit-lane speed limit enforcement at the Monaco Grand Prix. Officials had incorrectly measured the pit-lane distance, leading to faulty speed readings that resulted in penalties being issued to multiple drivers, including two against Gasly. Alpine lodged a successful right-of-review on June 16, presenting evidence of the measurement error and securing Gasly's reinstatement to the podium.
McLaren and Red Bull then filed appeals against the stewards' revised classification. The International Court of Appeal heard arguments from all parties on August 25, ultimately deciding to overturn the stewards' decision and restore the original race result, which benefited both McLaren and Red Bull at Alpine's expense.
The case, formally identified by the FIA as ICA-2026-06-07-08-09, covered appeals by McLaren Racing Limited and Red Bull Racing Limited against Stewards' Decisions No. 1 and No. 2 from the 2026 Monaco Grand Prix. McLaren's challenge encompassed not only the specific penalty decisions but also the revised final race classification and revised championship points allocation.
What happens next?
The International Court of Appeal's written decision has now been published, making it final. The dispute will likely dominate paddock conversation throughout the Italian Grand Prix weekend. Briatore's public accusations against a named judge represent an escalation that could draw scrutiny from the FIA's governance structures, particularly given Stella's warning that those making such allegations will face consequences. Marchino has been sought for comment on the accusations.
On track at Monza, Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton secured a one-two in first practice, with Mercedes' George Russell third and his teammate Kimi Antonelli fifth. In the second session, Russell topped the times by one-tenth of a second ahead of Leclerc, with Antonelli third, McLaren's Lando Norris fourth, and Hamilton fifth.
Key Facts
- Pierre Gasly was initially reinstated to third place at Monaco after Alpine's successful right-of-review proved pit-lane penalties were based on incorrect measurements
- The International Court of Appeal reversed that decision on September 4, demoting Gasly to seventh and restoring McLaren's Oscar Piastri to fourth and Red Bull's Isack Hadjar to third
- Briatore alleged that appeal judge Filippo Marchino had undisclosed connections to McLaren that should have disqualified him from the panel
- The four-judge panel's composition had been known six weeks in advance, allowing parties to object to any members
- The FIA stated its selection and appointment procedures met all required standards and were conducted to the highest standards
