Formula E is an unpredictable category, where small details can make the difference, including whether or not you pass the FIA technical checks at the end of the race, which on several occasions have changed the final result of a race. Porsche knows this well and over the last year has seen two penalties imposed which deprived it of a podium and a victory, for which an appeal has been made.
However, in both cases, a negative response came from the FIA, which two months after the events in Misano confirmed the disqualification from the first round of the Misano stage, with which Antonio Felix da Costa had been deprived of his first success seasonal in a very delicate phase of his career.
The Portuguese had in fact triumphed by overtaking Oliver Rowland’s Nissan with three laps to go, with a mini breakaway which later proved decisive in taking the lead even under the checkered flag. However, in the usual post-race checks, the FIA discovered that a component not permitted by the regulations had been mounted on his single-seater, namely the spring that manages the accelerator pedal.
Antonio Felix da Costa, Porsche, Oliver Rowland, Nissan, Andretti Autosport
Photo by: Andreas Beil
The German team immediately appealed, hoping to be able to overturn the result and regain those points which would also be fundamental in terms of the team and constructors’ standings in the battle with Jaguar. The appeal was examined last June 7 and, after a waiting period in which to evaluate all the available elements, the International Court of Appeal confirmed the commissioners’ decision to disqualify da Costa from the first Misano ePrix, therefore the victory remains in the hands of Rowland and Nissan.
Trying to defend itself, Porsche claimed that the spring in question had been used on the previous generation cars, the Gen 2, but had not been included in the Spark catalog for the Gen3, i.e. in that list of components that the sole supplier delivers to each grid stable with the various pieces permitted by the regulations.
In fact, in the catalog that component had been removed, but this had not been highlighted in some way, as happens instead for any changes and replacements, which are instead underlined in yellow, so that a team can notice it. According to what Motorsport.com learned, the difference between the two springs would be minimal, especially in terms of performance, but since it does not fall within the catalog of permitted elements, the disqualification for technical infringement was clearly triggered.
![Antonio Felix da Costa, Porsche](https://cdn.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YEQxQbpY/s1000/antonio-felix-da-costa-porsche.jpg)
Antonio Felix da Costa, Porsche
Photo by: Sam Bagnall / Motorsport Images
Furthermore, according to what emerges from the appeal documents, Porsche “was never reprimanded during the checks for having used the disputed spring [in precedenza], and it was impossible to check compliance with the entire catalog so soon before the race. Added to this is the fact that the use of the disputed spring did not give it any sporting advantage.”
However, the court noted that “the obligation to respect the technical regulations and the responsibility deriving from their non-compliance fall exclusively on the competitors”, which is why it is up to the teams to ensure they are in line with the regulatory standards before checks by of the delegates of the Federation.
The court that handled the appeal added another fundamental element. Porsche has in fact claimed that the spring has been checked several times since the start of Season 9, i.e. the first with Gen 3, in fact always receiving the approval of the sports stewards. On the other hand, however, according to the court the German team itself was not able to provide “any evidence of the fact that the FIA technical staff checked the disputed spring and admitted its conformity” after the start of the season 2022-23, despite the team using a portion that was effectively considered illegal over the last year and a half.
![Antonio Felix da Costa, Porsche, Porsche 99X Electric Gen3, Oliver Rowland, Nissan, Nissan e-4ORCE 04](https://cdn.motorsport.com/images/mgl/24vPA4q6/s1000/antonio-felix-da-costa-porsche.jpg)
Antonio Felix da Costa, Porsche, Porsche 99X Electric Gen3, Oliver Rowland, Nissan, Nissan e-4ORCE 04
Photo by: Andreas Beil
Another point of Porsche’s defense was the fact that the spring used in Gen 2 did not offer any competitive advantage. Although there are in fact no major differences, on a purely legal level this does not represent an excuse, because in fact the regulation was in any case violated, as stated in the documents: “In accordance with article 1.3.3 of the Code, ‘ If a car is found not to comply with the applicable technical standards, it will not be possible to argue that no performance advantage has been achieved.’
By rejecting the appeal and confirming the original decision of the stewards, da Costa and Porsche definitively lose the victory and the 25 points, leaving the German manufacturer 73 points behind Jaguar in the teams’ classification.
After the Misano race, da Costa achieved two more victories this season in the Berlin and Shanghai races. However, thanks to a difficult start to the season, the Portuguese now finds himself in seventh place, 83 points behind championship leader Nick Cassidy, with a gap that is essentially impossible to close with only four races remaining in the world championship. However, the growth highlighted in the second part of the championship is a positive sign for da Costa and the team, who aim to end the season with a good result.
#Porsche #appeal #Costas #disqualification #Misano #lost