The London High Court has allowed Felipe Massa to file a lawsuit to begin trial, but has ruled out any chance of changing the results of F1 2008 championship.
It all started after developments where former F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone admitted to knowing about the crashgate incident and hushing then FIA President Max Mosley to not make it public, to avoid a scandal against the sport and reputation being tarnished.
Ecclestone in an interview in March of 2023 noted how he asked Mosley to anyhow stop Nelson Piquet Sr from going public about the crashgate immediately after it happened in 2008 Singapore GP. Piquet Jr promptly informed his father about the incident, that was led by Renault and Flavio Briatore.
The crash eventually helped Fernando Alonso to win the 2008 Singapore GP and deny Ferrari’s Massa a chance at a victory while leading, as he ultimately lost the 2008 F1 drivers’ world championship to Lewis Hamilton by one point. The investigation by the FIA only took place in the summer of 2009.
They did impose bans on Renault, Briatore and Piquet Jr, but it didn’t alter the result as Hamilton retained his world title. Massa did not file any lawsuit then, but did so now after new information was revealed by Ecclestone. He eventually pressed charges on the Brit along with the FOM and FIA.
He is seeking 64 million euros in damage as part of lost earnings, while also trying to be named champion. The case had multiple hearings in the last few months at the London High Court, being overseen by Justice Jay. Massa was represented by a team of three lawyers, while Ecclestone had two and FOM & FIA had one each.
The defendants (Ecclestone, FOM and FIA) wanted Massa’s lawsuit to be dismissed on the grounds of contract breach, time limit, limitation and declarations. The contract ground saw a 50-50 response from Jay, who felt the FIA had a duty to investigate wrongdoing for its members, if not for Massa.
At the same time, there is no contractual bound on Massa and that the Brazilian was unaware of a lot of information that only came to light now via interviews. This, in fact, fulfilled the limitation ground, as it covers period from when the information is put out in public than when the original incident happened.
The judge feels that if Massa had full information back in time, he had real prospects in his case, which the Brazilian still has in terms of damage recovery. This is why the court has allowed the F1 race winner to proceed with the lawsuit to recover damages, but it has ruled out rewriting the 2008 world championship outcome.
Here’s the court ruling in full: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Felipe-Massa-v-Formula-One-and-others.pdf
Here’s summary: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Felipe-Massa-v-Formula-One-and-others-Summary.pdf
The FIA responded to the judgment, noting success on its side considering that the results will not be altered and that several allegations that the governing body did not act against the incident was dismissed by the judge. It also played down conspiracy charges laid down by the Brazilian.
The FIA summary –
In the judgment, the Court dismisses the following claims against the FIA:
- Mr Massa’s breach of contract claim which was based on the allegation that the FIA’s failure to investigate the Crashgate incident in 2008 was a breach of its regulations. This was dismissed on the basis that there was no real prospect of success, and because it is statute barred.
- Mr Massa’s tort claim against the FIA which was based on the same allegation as above, but asserting that this was also a breach of duty, was dismissed on the basis it was statute barred.
- Mr Massa’s claim for declarations that (i) the FIA acted in breach of its own regulations in allegedly failing to investigate the circumstances of Crashgate promptly in 2008; and (ii) had the FIA not breached its regulations, Mr Massa would have won the F1 Drivers’ Championship in 2008. These claims were dismissed as there was no real prospect of such declarations being made by the Court.
The Court emphasised in its judgment “a number of obstacles” Mr Massa faces on causation (paras. 147-148) – in other words, obstacles in establishing that the alleged conspiracy was the cause of his alleged losses. The Court also highlighted “serious doubts” about the breach of duty claim which Mr Massa is directed either to abandon or support with a further French law expert opinion before the Court decides whether to grant permission for it to continue (such continuance only being relevant to the conspiracy claim, as the standalone tort claim is statute barred, as per 2 above) (para. 223).
The Court has otherwise permitted the unlawful means conspiracy claim against the three Defendants to proceed to a full trial albeit on significantly narrowed grounds and subject to (i) reformulation of the claim by Mr Massa; (ii) the French law expert evidence mentioned above; and (iii) any applications for permission to appeal.
Here’s Lewis Hamilton on Felipe Massa case
Here’s official lawsuit from Felipe Massa
Here’s start of legal proceedings