McLaren’s right of review into Canadian GP penalty rejected

McLaren’s attempt to overturn Lando Norris’ penalty at the Canadian Grand Prix has been rejected by the Formula 1 stewards.

Two weeks ago in Montreal, Norris crossed the line in ninth place but was shuffled out of the points after being issued a five-second time penalty.

The stewards deemed that Norris drove in an “unsportsmanlike” manner when he slowed under a Safety Car to create a gap to team-mate Oscar Piastri ahead, as McLaren was pitting both of its drivers at the same time.

A hearing was held on Sunday morning at the Red Bull Ring ahead of the Austrian Grand Prix, where the stewards’ decision was upheld.

RelatedPosts

How the Austrian GP cemented F1 2025 as a two-horse race

6 hours ago

Toto Wolff: Kimi Antonelli’s ‘unfortunate’ Austria F1 error ‘can happen to the greats’

7 hours ago

McLaren presented “video, audio, GPS and timing evidence of eight different instances where cars made a gap that allegedly had a negative impact on a competitor and allegedly were not penalised” as well as notes taken during the FIA Team Managers meeting on June 30, 2023, which “allegedly showed the understanding of the teams was that the alleged infringement should not be penalised.”

However, Williams, who was also present at the meeting, highlighted that there were three instances that took place in 2016, 2017 and 2018 “where such actions as occurred in Canada 2023” were penalised.

It also said that in relation to the recent Team Managers meeting, there was “no general consensus at that meeting that Norris should not have been penalised, so therefore that meeting was not significant”.

The stewards judged that there was “no significant, new, relevant element that was unavailable to McLaren” and therefore rejected the appeal.

McLaren released a statement in which it asserts it accepted the decision despite believing it had submitted relevant new evidence.

“We respect the FIA and Stewards’ decision to uphold Lando Norris’ five-second time penalty at the 2023 Canadian Grand Prix,” it said.

“However, we believe that we provided sufficient new, significant and relevant evidence to warrant a ‘right of review’.

“We accept the Stewards’ decision that this evidence did not meet their requirements. Whilst it is not the outcome we hoped for, we thank the Stewards for their time and collaboration.”