While the deal could allow the FFP to escape a total ban from the Champions League by suspending them on a suspended reprieve to get their finances in order, it also opens a new legal procedure that would allow a team`s rivals to challenge their Champions League spot. “This type of agreement is a legal instrument recognized as an integral part of any disciplinary system and used by many authorities and other sports federations in the handling of disputes,” the FIA said in a statement on Thursday, concluding on Thursday: “The FIA will take all necessary measures to protect the sport and its role and reputation as a regulator.” After seven of the ten Formula 1 teams asked the FIA to be more transparent in their recent investigation into the legality of the Ferrari powertrain, the association explained why it decided to get a comparison with the Italian team instead of continuing the case. In response to a joint statement from the seven teams on Wednesday, the FIA gave more information on how it reached an agreement with Ferrari – details that had been kept secret between the Italian team and the confederation. The indeterminacy of last week`s conclusion – which did not say whether the engine was legal or not, what was the comparison or commitments agreed by Ferrari – angered the seven F1 teams to form a collective response at the threshold of the new season. The comparison between Ferrari and the FIA is also aimed at avoiding a possible violation of the regulations this season. The FIA has suspicions about the legality of Ferrari`s Power Unit, but has decided to accept a transaction rather than refer it to the International Criminal Court. It added that it was not satisfied with Ferrari`s defence of the legality of its engine, but was not convinced that it would achieve a final result by continuing the matter. 4. If a defendant does not comply with the terms of a transaction agreement, the CFCB`s chief auditor sends the matter back to the board. Ferrari has always maintained that its aggregate is perfectly legal. At the end of last year, team leader Mattia Binotto, long before the announcement of Ferrari`s agreement with the FIA, said that his team was among the most “controlled” at the start and that it had proved to the FIA that its aggregate was legal. 2.

Transaction agreements may define the obligation (s) to be fulfilled by the defendant, including the possible application of disciplinary measures and, if applicable, a specified period of time. The letter was a direct reaction to an FIA statement At the end of February, which confirmed that an investigation had taken place during the winter, it concluded that the details would remain confidential in a private transaction with the Italian team. The FIA had announced last week a comparison with Ferrari about the engine used last year, but the decision to have taken it because the aggregate of the Scuderia was legal or not is not yet known. Other issues that will need to be decided (perhaps by the CAS) in the first sanctions and resolution decisions are: 2. Currently, Article 15 refers to Schedule XI of the FFP regulations (which covers the size of the infringement, projected results, currency fluctuations and debt position) than the cases in which the resolution procedure can be applied. Probably the greater the projected loss or loss and the larger the debt, the less likely it is that a club will be “qualified” for a settlement. Many clubs will see this as a somewhat controversial regulatory inclusion.