Note: Please note that this index is provided for guidance only and has no binding force. The International Court of Appeal is not bound by its previous decisions. Appellant Competitor Sporting Rules and issues No. Date Contested Act(s) Decision of the Court (ASN) appealing discipline examined ICA-2015- 5.06.2015 Mr Nasser Al World Cup for Decision n°3 dated 2 April Power to lodge an An appeal before the ICA must be notified by the 01 Attiyah Cross Country 2015 of the Stewards appeal [Article 12.1.1 ASN of the competitor, whereas in this case the Rallies under which the car driven of the 2015 JDR] appeal was lodged directly by a representative of by the Appellant had the competitor failed to meet the measurements required of There is nothing in the JDR or in the Code that its vertical suspension authorises the Stewards, or holds out that the travel Stewards as having the right, to give instructions to the competitors with respect to the appeal procedure The appeal is inadmissible ICA-2014- 5.12.2014 Abu Dhabi Request for ICA-2014-04 Conditions of a request A request for review can be examined only if 04.2 Racing Team review for reviewing a new evidence is discovered which was unknown previous case [Article at the outset of the case before the ICA 18.3 of the 2014 JDR] The request is dismissed ICA-2014- 4.12.2014 QMMF Nasser Al- Middle East Decision n°1 dated 29 De novo power of the The Court has thus full authority to substitute the 04 Attiyah Team Rally November 2014 of the Court [Article 17.9 Stewards decision under appeal by its own Championship Stewards under which the 2014 JDR] decision in its full scope Appellant’s protest against Team Abu Dhabi Racing’s [Article 40.6.2 of the The Court finds that ensuring during a rally that car numbered 2 was FIA Middle East Rally all competitors follow the same itinerary is a rejected Championship Sporting specific sporting objective and that this objective Regulations which are is essential in order to ensure the fairness of the part of the FIA competition, besides the impact on the safety of Regional Rally the spectators. Regulations (the “FIA RRR”), under part “V3” (FIA RRR Appendix V3] The Court stresses that according to article 18.2 JDR, the expenses or legal defence fees of the [Article 18.2 2014 parties are not part of the costs awarded by the JDR] Court The contested decision is set aside ICA-2014- 26.09.2014 RFEdA Campos World Touring Decision n°5 dated 3 Rights of defense Even if there was a breach of rights of defense by 03 Racing Car August 2014 of the [Article 12.3.4 of the the stewards, such breach has been cured by the Championship Stewards of the 2014 ISC] devolutive effect of this appeal before the Court. Argentinian competition in De novo power of the The same applies to the allegedly insufficient Thermas de Rio Hondo Court [Article 17.9 grounds of the Decision 2014 JDR] The administrative typewriting error made by the Stewards in their Decision did not mislead the Non conformity of the Appellant ground clearance of the The Court emphasises that the obligation front splitter [Articles 5 imposed on competitors to ensure that their cars and 6 of the FIA 2014 comply with the relevant regulations is an World Touring Car absolute and objective one and that the breach of Championship Sporting that obligation does not depend upon a fault Regulations / Article being established 263.902 of Appendix J The Court refers to previous decisions where the of the 2014 ISC] ICA stressed that exceptional circumstances in relation with technical irregularities are admitted only under very limited criteria but in the present case the Court comes to the conclusion that the circumstances put forward by the Appellant do not meet the strict and clear criteria to constitute an exceptional circumstance The Court uphelds the contested decision ICA-2014- 17.10.2014 HKAA Team Craft GT Asia Series Decision handed down by Jurisdiction of the The Court considers that the devolutive effect of 02 Bamboo the national court of different national the appeals brought before it does not, in legal AMR appeal of the Japan appeal bodies [Article terms, allow it to examine in depth appeals that Automobile Federation 14.1.4 and 14.3.1 of the were inadmissible before the national court, (JAF) having ruled on an 2014 ISC] given that they had been brought in the first appeal against Decision instance before an incompetent court n°15 dated 1 June 2014 The Courts fins that the appeal initially brought taken by the Stewards of before the court of appeal of the JAF was the competition at inadmissible. Autopolis (Japan) The contested Stewards' Decision must 2 consequently be regarded as definitive, notwithstanding the incorrect formal execution of procedures that the Court notes in this case In view of the circumstances of the case, the Court decides that the costs must be shared equally between the Appellant and the JAF ICA-2014- 14.04.2014 ÖAMTC- Infiniti Red F1 Decision dated 16th Duty to comply with The Court finds that (i) the TD are not legally 01 OSK Bull Racing March 2014 of the Race the regulations [Article binding per se but (ii) if a competitor decides not Stewards of the 2014 5.1.4 of the FIA 2014 to follow the TD, he has to accept the risk that Australian Grand Prix by Formula One Technical the evidence he intends to bring as an alternative which car No. 3 (Driver Regulations] to that foreseen by the TD will not satisfy the Daniel Ricciardo) was Fuel flow meter sensor Technical Delegate found to be not in Duty to comply with In the present case, the appellant failed to compliance with the the regulations at any convince the Court that its car complied with Technical Regulations and time of the event Article 5.1.4 TR at all times during the event therefore excluded from [Article 2.7 TR] The Court confirms the contested decision the results of the race Legal value of the FIA technical directions ICA-2013- 20.12.2013 ACI- Tony Kart CIK-FIA KF Decision of the Stewards Violation of the The Court confirms the contested decision 06 CSAI Racing Team Junior World of the Meeting of the sporting regulations Championship Bahrain event dated 23 [Article 2.14.B of the November 2013 under CIK General which the Stewards prescriptions / Article decided to sanction Tony 2.c of the Code of Kart Racing Team’s driver Driving Conduct on Nikita Mazepin (RUS) Karting Circuits] with a 10-second time To leave the track and penalty to gain an advantage ICA-2013- 10.01.2014 ACI- Romeo Superstars Decision of the Motor Duty to comply with The Court: 05 CSAI Ferraris srl International Sports Council National the regulations [Articles 1) Sets aside the Decision of the Motor Sports Series Court of the Motor Sports 13.3.2 b3 and 13.6 of Council National Court of the Motor Sports Association (MSA) dated the Technical Association (MSA) for lack of jurisdiction; 15 October 2013, whereby Regulations of the 2) Confirms the contested decision n° 5 dated 27 the two Romeo Ferraris International Series] September 2013 with respect to the finding that srl’s cars were excluded Conformity of the car’s cars n° 3 and n° 15 of Romeo Ferraris Srl did not for the Donington Park bonnets and flat bottom comply with the Technical Regulations event Jurisdiction of the national tribunal [ISC, 3 art. 182] Impossibility of increasing the sanction or disproportionate nature of the sanction [ISC, art. 189 / Article 17.9 JDR] ICA-2013- ACCUS Devlin De Karting Decision dated 29 Gain of position from The appeal was withdrawn by the Applicant 04 Francesco (Canadian September of the National contact [Standard Karting Court of ASN Canada karting penalties 1-15] Championship) FIA, wherein it was decided to penalize Devlin De Francesco by a loss of one position as a result of an appeal lodged against a decision taken by the Stewards of the final race of the 2013 Canadian Karting Championship ICA-2013- 10.09.2013 RAF G-Drive WEC Decision n°36 of the Race Duty to comply with The responsibility of the competitors to ensure 03 Racing Stewards of the Meeting in the regulations [2013 technical conformity of their car is absolute and Le Mans counting towards WEC Regulations, art. objective the 2013 FIA World 6 / 2013 International This does not mean the responsibility is without Endurance Championship Sporting Code, art. 123] any limits, as there could potentially occur very (WEC), under which the Severity of a sanction rare and exceptional situation, where highly Stewards decided to of exclusion for exceptional circumstances may be a reason for exclude G-Drive Racing’s breaching the duty to application of a less severe sanction than LMP2 car n°26 from the comply exclusion (not in the present case) Le Mans 24 Hours event The Court confirmed the Contested Decision on 2013 the basis that no exceptional circumstances existed in this case ICA-2013- 28.02.2013 RACB Marc VDS Blancpain Decision n°3/2012 of the Power of the NCA and The Court: 02 racing team Endurance National Appeal and of the ICA to review 1) declares void Decision n°3/2012 of the (Belgian Disciplinary Tribunal of facts and legal grounds National Appeal and Disciplinary Court of the Racing s.a.) the Spanish Royal not mentioned in the Spanish Royal Automobile Federation and Automobile Federation, Protest 4 under which the National Infringement to the Decision n°13 taken by the Stewards on 14 Tribunal decided to refuelling procedure October 2012 dismiss the appeal filed by [2012, Blancpain 2) imposes a fine of 10,000 euros on the Belgian the Marc VDS racing team Endurance Series Audi Club Team WRT against Decision n°13 Sporting Regulations, taken by the Stewards on art.