The Limits of F1 Overtaking Rules: A Legal Examination of the Ambiguity in Harsh Penalties at the Canadian GP

Written by: Attorney Satoshi Tanikawa

Born in the peak year of the Senna-Prost rivalry, 1989, Satoshi grew up watching Formula 1 under his father’s influence, with the McLaren MP4-5B being the first car to capture his heart. He continues to visit circuits and has even traveled to Europe, keeping a keen eye on pit wall strategies and interpretations of regulations. His passion for the sport has extended to an interest in the rules of competition and technical regulations. As an attorney, he contemplates issues related to F1 and legal affairs.

The final race of F1 concludes with the waving of the checkered flag. However, the adjudication of the race can lead to “off-track brawls” even after the race has ended. In the 2025 F1 Canadian Grand Prix (10th race), several drivers were confirmed to have overtaken under the safety car-led finish, resulting in seven drivers being subject to scrutiny by the stewards.

The Safety Car (SC) is a vehicle that leads the pack to ensure safe formation driving when a major accident or hazard occurs on the track. It plays a role in reducing the speed of the cars to prevent secondary accidents and allows marshals to work safely on the track.

As covered in our previous article, Yuki Tsunoda of Oracle Red Bull Racing received a 10-grid penalty for overtaking Piastri’s damaged car during a red flag. In the subsequent race, despite overtaking being generally prohibited during SC conditions, he was only given a light penalty of a “Warning”.

Let’s delve into the application and discretion of safety regulations in F1 from a legal and regulatory perspective, exploring the ambiguity and what fairness means for drivers and fans alike.

The Drama of F1 Adjudication Continues Even After the Race

The 2025 Canadian Grand Prix concluded with Mercedes’ George Russell taking the victory and Oracle Red Bull Racing’s Max Verstappen finishing in second place. This marked Mercedes’ first win of the 2025 season, and the event garnered much praise, particularly for the youngest driver of the year, Andrea Kimi Antonelli, who achieved his first podium finish.

However, multiple incidents during and after the race left the final standings in limbo for some time. The focus was on the overtaking issue under the Safety Car (SC) conditions.

The incident that sparked controversy occurred towards the end of the race, involving a collision between McLaren’s Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri. Norris’s car crashed into Piastri’s rear bumper, resulting in significant damage and a heartbreaking retirement as it slammed into the pit wall. Piastri also slowed down with a punctured tire and eventually came to a stop at the side of the track.

This collision scattered wings, tire fragments, and debris from the cars across the racing line, creating a hazardous situation that required marshals to enter the track and clear the debris with utmost dedication. Although it was too dangerous to immediately resume normal racing, the situation did not warrant stopping the race with a red flag. Consequently, the race officials decided to bring out the SC to safely conclude the race.

As a result, the race ended under the SC’s lead, and by the time the checkered flag was waved, the SC had returned to the pit lane. However, the ‘SC’ light panels were still illuminated on the track, which, according to the rules, clearly prohibits overtaking.

Nevertheless, Mercedes’ Andrea Kimi Antonelli, who finished in third place, overtook Verstappen immediately after the finish. Additionally, Oscar Piastri (McLaren), Esteban Ocon (Haas), Charles Leclerc (Ferrari), Carlos Sainz Jr. (Williams), Pierre Gasly (Alpine), and Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) were all subject to scrutiny for overtaking during the SC period.

Why Did the F1 Canadian GP Only Result in a “Warning”?

Article 55, paragraph 8 of the International Sporting Code stipulates the following regarding overtaking during a safety car period:

Except in the cases listed from a) to h), no driver may overtake another car on the track, including the safety car, until they have passed the line.

International Sporting Code (translated)

Despite this clear regulation, none of the drivers involved were subjected to severe penalties such as grid demotion; instead, they all received only a “Warning”.

The FIA stewards explained that the location of the incident was clearly before turn 1, where there was no increased danger, but given that the deployment of marshals or emergency vehicles could not be ruled out, cautious driving was required. However, they determined that the overtaking by each car was only temporary and did not result in any significant danger, and therefore, at their discretion, decided to issue only a warning.

Tsunoda’s Perspective and the Issue of Fairness in F1

In response to the ruling, Tsunoda, who had received a significant penalty of a 10-grid demotion the previous day, let out his frustration over the radio saying:

“I got that ridiculous penalty during the red flag yesterday, so the driver who overtook this time should also be penalized.”

Although there is a difference in circumstances between a red flag and a safety car period, the fact that different rulings were made for actions during a ‘no overtaking’ condition may understandably lead to feelings of unfairness, as expressed by Tsunoda.

Legal Perspective: The Discretionary Judgments in F1 and the Clarity of Rules

The discrepancies in such rulings highlight the limits of the ‘discretionary judgments’ made by the FIA. While overtaking actions during a Safety Car (SC) period are clear violations, the criteria for determining the severity of penalties can vary depending on the situation and intent, leaving a lack of clarity for the parties and spectators involved, and raising questions. Drivers and teams, who battle at extreme speeds, are required to make immediate decisions based on the circumstances. It is inevitable that the broad ‘discretionary judgments’ granted to the FIA sometimes cast significant doubt on them.

This case suggests that not only the codification of rules but also their implementation requires transparency and consistency.

Summary: How to Ensure the Reliability of Rules in Formula 1

During the recent Canadian Grand Prix, the situation called into question the consistency of rule enforcement in Formula 1, as a severe penalty for overtaking during a red flag was issued alongside a minor penalty for overtaking during a Safety Car period.

Looking ahead, there is an expectation for clearer and more consistent rule enforcement that aims to balance driver safety with fair adjudication.

Related article: F1 Legal Lab

Guidance on Measures by Our Firm

Monolith Law Office is a law firm with high expertise in both IT, particularly the internet, and legal matters. Our firm provides support in human resources and labor management, as well as drafting and reviewing contracts for various cases, serving clients ranging from Tokyo Stock Exchange Prime-listed companies to venture businesses. For more details, please refer to the article below.

Areas of Practice at Monolith Law Office: Corporate Legal Affairs for IT & Startups