The Sauber F1 Team has announced in a statement that it has extended the contracts of its current drivers, Marcus Ericcson and Felipe Nasr.The Swede and the Brazilian will again form the driver line-up for the Swiss Team in the 2016 FIA Formula One World Championship.
This forum contains threads to discuss teams themselves. Anything not technical about the cars, including restructuring, performances etc belongs here.
Jonnycraig wrote:
"The Respondent was ordered to refrain from taking any action the effect of which would be to deprive Mr van der Garde of his entitlement to participate in the 2015 Formula One Season as one of Sauber's two nominated race drivers," court documents claim.
That's pretty unequivocal.
Equally I'm not surprised there aren't any other sources as the local paper have found that out from court documents that have been filed in support of VDG's case. Clearly it's all been going on quietly behind the scenes until now.
Had for some reason managed to miss that part under the picture, my bad
Being from Switzerland, I haven't heard or read anything in the local newspapers. I also just checked, and despite a few articles dating back to November 2014 when Nasr got the seat, I can't find anything. I wouldn't be surprised if some things here are "lost in translation". I also wouldn't cary too much weight about that lost "court case". The (civil) justice system is rather complicated, especially in Switzerland. I also wouldn't bet against a judge who made a civil ruling that is quite detached from reality. I also have no idea what the "Arbitration Institution in Switzerland" refers to. Doesn't quite make sense to me either way - anyone here have a clue what this institution is called in German?
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Phil wrote:Being from Switzerland, I haven't heard or read anything in the local newspapers. I also just checked, and despite a few articles dating back to November 2014 when Nasr got the seat, I can't find anything. I wouldn't be surprised if some things here are "lost in translation". I also wouldn't cary too much weight about that lost "court case". The (civil) justice system is rather complicated, especially in Switzerland. I also wouldn't bet against a judge who made a civil ruling that is quite detached from reality. I also have no idea what the "Arbitration Institution in Switzerland" refers to. Doesn't quite make sense to me either way - anyone here have a clue what this institution is called in German?
I presume it's the ASA, Association Suisse de l'Arbitrage.
In german, Schweiz Vereinigung fur Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit
I'm still unsure what exactly it is (I found the ASA website too). Not sure what kind of a court it is and how much weight a decision from there carries. It certainly doesn't sound like a normal civil case. I don't think it carries that much weight...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Phil wrote:I'm still unsure what exactly it is (I found the ASA website too). Not sure what kind of a court it is and how much weight a decision from there carries. It certainly doesn't sound like a normal civil case. I don't think it carries that much weight...
If they are being included in high value contracts as the designated arbitrator, they must have some form of legal standing. A poster on the autosport forum claims they have a very good reputation and that their verdicts carry a lot of weight but who knows.
Just more mess from a team clearly living hand to mouth.
From what I gather, I think there are two relevant questions in regards to this case:
1.) Was there a written and signed legal contract between V.d. Garde and Sauber? Or was it simply vocal?
2.) What was the damage to V.d. Garde when that contract was cancelled?
From the articles I found, it sounds that there may have been a (written) contract of some sorts - or indeed a vocal agreement, but that on the next day, Nasr outbidded him, which resulted in him getting the contract. If the time frame is really that narrow, I wonder what 'damages' V.d. Garde can prove that would force Sauber to respect the signed agreement.
If it was simply a vocal agreement on the night before, he might not have much to stand on, hence why Sauber is ignoring them.
I fear the whole situation might be more complicated. With the serious money issues Sauber has, I could well imagine that the situation for them was; sign V.d. Garde and not race in 2015 because it simply wasn't enough what he was offering, or cancel that agreement and go with Nasr because the amount of money he is offering is, from what I read, substantially more...
Anyway, really not sure how the ASA fits into this. International law might be a tad bit over my basic knowlege of the justice system, so I really don't know. I would think however that if it was serious enough, we would have read something in the local newspapers by now. With this latest development, I'm sure there will be some news soon, which might clear up what kind of a ruling there was in the first place. I'll keep my eyes open...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
I think the topic is overblown and a lot of information is "lost in translation". As noted in the 2015 Australian race topic, I'm unsure what justice system (or court) as effectively ruled in V.D. Garde's favour and how substantial such a ruling is. From what I gather, it's the ASA (Association Suisse de l'Arbitrage) which might be relevant as the case is dealing with international law (to a degree), though I'm really unsure at this point.
There has been no news whats-so-ever in the local papers here (I am from Switzerland), so until there is, I will treat this with a bit of skeptism. I'll keep my eyes open and see if any thing pops up and might clear up what court actually made a ruling and how significant it is.
The justice system in Switzerland is quite complicated where civil cases are concerned...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
1.) Was there a written and signed legal contract between V.d. Garde and Sauber? Or was it simply vocal?
We can presume that some sort of written agreement is present. Although a vocal agreement is binding, proving its existance in practice is very difficult. The case usually gets dismissed. Since there's a verdict, it's reasonable to assume a written agreement. However, the content of it is not clear at presence, and might have all sorts of clauses, in favour or not in favour of Giedo.
2.) What was the damage to V.d. Garde when that contract was cancelled?
From the articles I found, it sounds that there may have been a (written) contract of some sorts - or indeed a vocal agreement, but that on the next day, Nasr outbidded him, which resulted in him getting the contract. If the time frame is really that narrow, I wonder what 'damages' V.d. Garde can prove that would force Sauber to respect the signed agreement.
You are forgetting the damage received by having putting time, effort and resources into succesfully negotiating the agreement.
I doubt this verdict is going to mean anything. Probably the verdict's consequences are limited to the grounds of Switzerland. Unless Switzerland suddenly jumps us with a surprise GP, the verdict cannot be applied on the grand prix's.
Sure, absolutely. My point was more that those "damages" must be rather limited, as say compared to the situation where in a driver has a valid contract for multiple months and then gets sacked in the last possible moment to another driver, resulting in him falling out for an entire season because he can no longer commit to any other racing series or job opportunity.
I also find it unlikely that such a court ruling would infact force a team like Sauber to actually let him race. I'm pretty certain the worst case scenario would be some kind of settlement where in Sauber might have to pay damages (= Konventionalstrafe, or in english; fine for breach of contract). But forcing to let him race? I really can't see that happening...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Phil wrote:Sure, absolutely. My point was more that those "damages" must be rather limited, as say compared to the situation where in a driver has a valid contract for multiple months and then gets sacked in the last possible moment to another driver, resulting in him falling out for an entire season because he can no longer commit to any other racing series or job opportunity.
I also find it unlikely that such a court ruling would infact force a team like Sauber to actually let him race. I'm pretty certain the worst case scenario would be some kind of settlement where in Sauber might have to pay damages (= Konventionalstrafe, or in english; fine for breach of contract). But forcing to let him race? I really can't see that happening...
Can't seem to think that too. They'll probably end up paying a fine.
I'm quite surprised Sauber let this thing slip so far. Usually these things are handled in all serenity (actually secrecy is a better word), far away from any media attention or courts, with both parties reaching an agreement where drivers gets compensated and the team gets a signature from the driver to never ever speak of this in public. So either v.d. garde refused to reach such a 'beneath the table' agreement, or Sauber completely and utterly ignored him.
However, demanding he gets raced by the team is frankly an insane demand at this point. It would require him to go to EVERY court of each country that hosts a Grand Prix. That'll require a translator too, again one for each country. He could easily buy a drive somewhere else with the money he would need to spend in total to get court verdicts. Not to mention given how slow courts work. In a lot of cases he'll probably only get a verdict after the race was done.
turbof1 wrote:
I'm quite surprised Sauber let this thing slip so far. Usually these things are handled in all serenity (actually secrecy is a better word), far away from any media attention or courts, with both parties reaching an agreement where drivers gets compensated and the team gets a signature from the driver to never ever speak of this in public. So either v.d. garde refused to reach such a 'beneath the table' agreement, or Sauber completely and utterly ignored him.
Van Der Garde is married to the daughter of Marcel Boekhoorn. Estimated worth, £1bn.
They clearly don't want or need the money back, they want the race seat that Sauber signed a binding contract for. And clearly that's very bad news for Sauber.
Clearly it has all been handled in secrecy until now. Van Der Garde took them to arbitration and won. By now filing their driver list with the FIA, they've ignord that ruling and so its all come out as he once again seeks it's legal enforcement.
I'm not sure what basis GVDG is taking legal action on but successful or not I think there are two very likely outcomes:
1) He wont be driving a Sauber in Australia
2) He wont be driving any F1 car in the future
Teams don't want legal battles with drivers its costly and distracting, there are plenty of other drivers out there with money so they'll just keep well away from GVDG after this.
If the money was paid and the contract is not being honoured then he would be better off trying to get the money back rather than get the drive as this is a more understandable reason to take legal action.
"A pretentious quote taken out of context to make me look deep" - Some old racing driver
I think it just shows how vulnerable Sauber is. They are really struggling and as such, I could very well imagine, that drivers, like V.D. Garde [with lots of financial backing] might be trying to force their way. If Sauber was in a healthy situation, they would just shrug it off or pay what was needed...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
turbof1 wrote:
I'm quite surprised Sauber let this thing slip so far. Usually these things are handled in all serenity (actually secrecy is a better word), far away from any media attention or courts, with both parties reaching an agreement where drivers gets compensated and the team gets a signature from the driver to never ever speak of this in public. So either v.d. garde refused to reach such a 'beneath the table' agreement, or Sauber completely and utterly ignored him.
Van Der Garde is married to the daughter of Marcel Boekhoorn. Estimated worth, £1bn.
They clearly don't want or need the money back, they want the race seat that Sauber signed a binding contract for. And clearly that's very bad news for Sauber.
Clearly it has all been handled in secrecy until now. Van Der Garde took them to arbitration and won. By now filing their driver list its the FIA, they've ignord that ruling and so its all come out as he once again seeks it's legal enforcement.
Right, but as mentioned that will probably require going to each court of each country that hosts a race. Well, looks like he is actually intending that, as he wants to the court in Melbourne on monday...
v.d. Garde won nothing. He won one single court in a country that does not hosts a Grand Prix. The verdict isn't appliable abroad.
Sure enough he doesn't do to get his damages back out of it, but I clearly don't see him racing. Many courts tent to look first if the contract can still be reasonably applied. Given someone else is in the seat, it can't be. Hence in front of those many courts, only a verdict about compensation can and will be reached.
Like Facts Only said, it would be just better to get your compensation out of this and move on.
