F1, FIA and Bernie Ecclestone head to Supreme Court over Felipe Massa Crashgate scandal

Massa in the Imola paddock in 2022 — Photo: © IMAGO

Latest F1 News

F1 Crashgate scandal is heading for the Supreme Court in dramatic new development

F1, the FIA and Ecclestone are appealing against another of Massa's claims

Kerry Violet F1 News Editor

F1 editor and journalist covering motorsport since 2024.

Wednesday 10 June 2026 20:54

The Supreme Court has greenlit a 'leapfrog' appeal for Formula One Management, the FIA and former F1 CEO Bernie Ecclestone to directly hear their argument against Felipe Massa over the sport's Crashgate scandal.

Massa may have retired from F1 following the 2017 campaign but he has made headlines over the past year as he seeks damages of up to £64 million for what he alleges was a breach of contract or duty over the 2008 scandal.

At the Singapore Grand Prix of that year, Nelson Piquet Jr acted on orders from Renault team boss Flavio Briatore and deliberately crashed his car, triggering a safety car which benefitted team-mate Fernando Alonso and helped him to go on and win the race.

Article continues under video

Prior to the safety car, Massa had been leading the pack but went on to finish outside the points in P13, a result which he claims robbed him of the drivers' championship later that year.

The Brazilian driver lost out on the title in the very last race to a young Lewis Hamilton, who in only his sophomore campaign, infamously beat Massa to the championship victory by a single point at the season-ending Brazilian GP.

Lewis Hamilton claimed the world title in 2008.

Massa alleges that had the crash been investigated and the cheating confirmed in 2008 rather than 2009 (when Piquet Jr provided a sworn statement to the FIA admitting the crash was deliberate), the result of the Singapore GP would have been annulled and he would have won the title.

F1 HEADLINES: Christian Horner excited about new job as Newey comes under pressure

F1 & FIA 'leapfrog' Court of Appeal over Crashgate conspiracy

Massa was told there was no possibility of him winning a declaration that the 2008 championship was rightfully his, but the court ruled he could try to recover damages.

In March 2026, the High Court ordered the defendants (FOM, the FIA and Ecclestone) to pay the former Ferrari driver £250,000 to cover the costs associated with the latest round of applications in the ongoing court case.

At the time, Massa said: "I look forward to proving in court that they conspired to conceal the truth, and I will use all legal means to ensure that this injustice is corrected. Formula One is the greatest sport in the world, but it is essential that it is also the fairest."

Three months on however and the defendants have made the next move, successfully 'leapfrogging' the standard appeal process with the Supreme Court over Massa's unlawful means conspiracy.

The ex-F1 star alleges that the defendants conspired not to investigate the deliberate nature of the crash in 2008, prior to the conclusion of the 2008 championship.

Massa is relying on unlawful means consisting of: (i) alleged breaches of contractual duties owed by the FIA to its members (which do not include Massa); and (ii) a French law tort claim, said to render those breaches actionable in tort by Massa.

FOM, the FIA and F1 supremo Ecclestone applied for Massa’s claims to be summarily dismissed and after a three-day hearing last October, Mr Justice Jay dismissed a variety of Mr Massa’s claims, but allowed the unlawful means conspiracy claim to proceed to a full trial.

The defendants have now sought permission to appeal directly to the Supreme Court against Mr Justice Jay’s decision not to dismiss the unlawful means conspiracy claim, pursuant to section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1969 which permits a ‘leapfrog’ appeal directly to the Supreme Court where (among other things): (a) there is a point of law of general public importance, and (b) that point of law is one in respect of which the judge is bound by a decision of the Court of Appeal or of the Supreme Court in previous proceedings.

Their permission to appeal the decision not to strike out the respondent’s unlawful means conspiracy claim has now been granted, meaning the appellant must now file notice of an intention to proceed with the appeal before a hearing takes place before the Supreme Court.

Written by

Kerry Violet - F1 News Editor

Having graduated from the University of Sheffield with a 2:1 in Journalism in 2022, Kerry continued her pursuit of finding a full-time position in motorsport through work with the F1 Arcade in London, where she got to meet true fans of the sport and make a live grand prix watch party memorable for them. It was here that she confirmed her dream of combining her background in journalism and love of motorsport, going on to volunteer with the female-led platform Empoword Journalism. Having completed stints as a screen editor and sports editor, Kerry landed her first F1-specific editorial role with GPFans and has thoroughly enjoyed continuing to work closely with the sport ever since. The access GPFans offers Kerry has allowed her to interview big names such as Naomi Schiff and David Coulthard and given her experiences she could only have dreamt of as a young F1 fan.

View full biography

F1 Lewis Hamilton FIA Renault Bernie Ecclestone Felipe Massa