Aston confirms Vettel appeal, adds right to review

Aston Martin Racing has pushed ahead with its appeal against Sebastian Vettel's disqualification in the Hungarian Grand Prix, and also requested a right to review alongside the appeal.

Vettel was disqualified from second place after the team was unable to get a 1.0-liter sample of fuel from his car for the FIA to inspect, with only 0.3 liters possible. However, Aston Martin was certain the required amount of fuel was in the car and immediately lodged its intention to appeal. The team had 96 hours to confirm it would appeal or withdraw it, but as well as pushing ahead it also believes it has found “significant new evidence” relating to the incident and so is requesting a right to review the penalty.

More Formula 1

F1’s battle with the law of unintended consequences

Don't write Red Bull off despite departures - Brown

McNish takes on Audi F1 racing director role

“After Sebastian Vettel’s drive to second place on the road in the Hungarian Grand Prix on Sunday August 1st, he was disqualified from the results when a 1.0-liter sample of fuel was not able to be taken from his car after the race (a requirement as set out in the FIA Formula One Technical Regulations),” the team statement read. “There was and is no suggestion that Vettel’s Aston Martin Cognizant Formula One Team AMR21 car benefited from a performance advantage from the alleged regulatory breach, or that it was deliberate.

“Since the team’s data indicated that there was more than 1.0 liter of fuel in the car after the race -- 1.74 liters according to the data -- the team immediately reserved its right to appeal, and has requested a right of review alongside the appeal procedure, as a result of having discovered significant new evidence relevant to the sanction which was unavailable to it at the time of the FIA stewards' decision.”

While the appeal will be heard by the FIA, as with the recent Red Bull request for a right to review, Aston Martin will need to convince the stewards that the evidence is both new -- as in unavailable to all parties when the original decision was made -- and significant. If it manages to do that, then the penalty will be reviewed, but there are no guarantees it would be overturned on that basis.