Appeal #1 (Faster Than Speed)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #4
Drivers involved: Jack Keithley, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are rejected. The WC Race Director's decision stands.
Non-unanimous verdict detail (Statement by Trayan Sarafov):
Keithley made two defensive moves - first to the inside (to the pits) and then to the outside (to the grandstands). There is clearly an inconsistency in Race director's judgements, if we consider the situation between the two drivers in Bahrain (referring to incident #10). None of them could be considered dangerous or reflecting the race results. They are against the racing spirit and that is intolreable. So 0,5 pp for Keithley here.
Appeal #2 (Faster Than Speed)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #7
Drivers involved: Jim Parisis, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are accepted. The Court of Appeal has decided to remove the Official warning handed to Patrick De Wit.
Non-unanimous verdict detail (Statement by Dani Fuxa):
Now this one is interesting, because the difference between this one and #9 is it seems that the car ahead of De Wit was forced to change his racing line to avoid an accident, he was ahead of De Wit and could have took his normal racing line, but instead, he had to alter his line because De Wit dived to the inside making a massive lock-up. In my opinion that should be a warning to De Wit for over-agressive overtake.
Appeal #3 (Faster Than Speed)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #9
Drivers involved: Jim Parisis, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are accepted. The Court of Appeal has decided to remove the 0.5 licence points penalty handed to Patrick De Wit.
Appeal #4 (Venus Project Racing)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #1
Drivers involved: Adrian Rodriguez, Antonio Kolarec
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are rejected. The WC Race Director's decision stands.
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #4
Drivers involved: Jack Keithley, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are rejected. The WC Race Director's decision stands.
Non-unanimous verdict detail (Statement by Trayan Sarafov):
Keithley made two defensive moves - first to the inside (to the pits) and then to the outside (to the grandstands). There is clearly an inconsistency in Race director's judgements, if we consider the situation between the two drivers in Bahrain (referring to incident #10). None of them could be considered dangerous or reflecting the race results. They are against the racing spirit and that is intolreable. So 0,5 pp for Keithley here.
Appeal #2 (Faster Than Speed)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #7
Drivers involved: Jim Parisis, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are accepted. The Court of Appeal has decided to remove the Official warning handed to Patrick De Wit.
Non-unanimous verdict detail (Statement by Dani Fuxa):
Now this one is interesting, because the difference between this one and #9 is it seems that the car ahead of De Wit was forced to change his racing line to avoid an accident, he was ahead of De Wit and could have took his normal racing line, but instead, he had to alter his line because De Wit dived to the inside making a massive lock-up. In my opinion that should be a warning to De Wit for over-agressive overtake.
Appeal #3 (Faster Than Speed)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #9
Drivers involved: Jim Parisis, Patrick de Wit
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are accepted. The Court of Appeal has decided to remove the 0.5 licence points penalty handed to Patrick De Wit.
Appeal #4 (Venus Project Racing)
WC Race Director's Post-Race Checks incident #1
Drivers involved: Adrian Rodriguez, Antonio Kolarec
Verdict:
The appellant's facts are rejected. The WC Race Director's decision stands.
