Fascinating read and it makes you wonder what kind of idiots run the appellants legal Departments. They went to court with arguments they had no proof of and furthermore were basing their argument on a matter of interpretation. Interpretations that were clearly out on the thinnest of limbs.
All credit to Brawn et al for spotting the advantage to be gained from the regulations and more fool Ferrari and it's fellow appellants for trying to argue otherwise. I can't believe they had the cheek to call Brawn "supremely arrogant" when they went to court with such a weak case.