As his legal challenge gets underway in London, Felipe Massa's claim on the 2008 world championship title is described as "misguided".
The Brazilian claims that losing the 2008 title by a single point hinged on the fact that the result of that year's Singapore Grand Prix should have been thrown out as a result of Nelson Piquet deliberately crashing his Renault.
Massa had been leading the race, but following the crash, which brought out the Safety Car, the Ferrari driver lost the lead due to a botched pit stop.
"Crash-gate", as it came to be known, saw Renault boss Flavio Briatore banned from the sport and led to the French manufacturer withdrawing from F1 - though both subsequently returned.
Massa lost out on the title by one point after rival Lewis Hamilton finished fifth in Brazil, the final race of the season, overtaking Timo Glock in the final corner of the final lap.
However, in 2023, in an interview with Germany's F1-Insider, Ecclestone was quoted as saying that he and (then) FIA president Max Mosley were aware of what had happened in Singapore.
"Piquet Jr had told his father Nelson that he had been asked by the team to deliberately drive into the wall at a certain point in time in order to trigger a safety car phase and help his team-mate Alonso," said the former F1 supremo. "We decided not to do anything for the time being. We wanted to protect the sport and save it from a huge scandal.
"There was a rule at the time that a world championship ranking was untouchable after the FIA awards ceremony at the end of the year," he added. "So Hamilton was presented with the world championship trophy and everything was fine."
Not so, according to Massa who is seeking £64m ($84m) in damages.
"Accountability is key to preventing future fraud," the Brazilian told The Times. "Those entrusted with protecting the sport directly violated their duties, and they cannot be allowed to benefit from concealing their own misconduct.
"Such conduct is unacceptable in any sphere of life," he added, "especially in a sport followed by millions, including children. We will pursue this to the very end in order to achieve a just and fair outcome, for myself, for motorsport in Brazil, and for the sport as a whole."
Speaking in September, Ecclestone insisted that his previous comments had been misunderstood.
"This was an interview I gave to someone in Germany. And the guy at the time, his English wasn't that good and he was taking notes, and it was picked up by someone in England," he said. "The lawyers for myself, the FIA and F1 do not understand how it can be heard in a court."
As the case gets underway in London, Ecclestone's lawyer David Quest KC described Massa's claim as a "misguided attempt to reopen the results of the 2008 F1 drivers' championship".
"Mr Massa argues that, but for the FIA's handling of the crash, he would have won the drivers' championship," he told the court. "These declarations treat the court as a sports 'debating club', asking it to embark upon a counterfactual exercise concerning the 'refereeing' of a sporting event which took place nearly 17 years ago."
John Mehrzad KC, acting for the FIA, described Massa's claim as being as "torturous as it is overly ambitious" and "conspicuously overlooks a catalogue of his own errors", while Anneliese Day KC, acting for Formula One Management, said in written submissions that the claim "will fail".
"In truth, it was not the deployment of the safety car which changed the course of history for Mr Massa, but rather a series of subsequent racing errors by him and his team during the remaining 47 laps of the race," she argued.
"The simple fact is that over the course of both the Singapore Grand Prix and across the 2008 season, Mr Hamilton outperformed Mr Massa and everyone else."
Nick De Marco KC, who is acting for Massa, said in written submissions that the defendants "cannot establish that Mr Massa's claims have no real prospect of success".
"Mr Massa has a real prospect of succeeding on all of the grounds," he insisted. "Whether the FIA breached its duties is a fact-sensitive issue on which the court should not conduct a mini trial," he added.
The hearing is due to conclude on Friday, with a ruling at a later date.
sign in