Bianchi family starts legal action aginst F1 over Jules death

[John S]

Yes they can, but would Jules himself want this?????????

Surely race drivers accept this risk?

All I can see coming from this is a halting of all wet races if the court rules entirely in their favour, no series organiser - F1 or otherwise - will want to take the chance.   

http://en.f1i.com/news/56599-bianchi-family-launches-legal-action-fia-marussia.html

[cosworth151]

Every time I've raced, I had to sign a waiver, exempting the track, owners, sponsors, etc from any responsibility for injury or death. If little, back woods dirt bull rings do it, surly Bernie's top priced legal eagles have something similar.

[Jericoke]

Every time I've raced, I had to sign a waiver, exempting the track, owners, sponsors, etc from any responsibility for injury or death. If little, back woods dirt bull rings do it, surly Bernie's top priced legal eagles have something similar.

Legally, those waivers rarely stand up in court.

If you're hurt because someone did something stupid, a signature is no protection.

I agree that F1 drivers accept the risk.  Hopefully the outcome of this is a clear delineation of what risks people are taking in their professional lives.

[lkjohnson1950]

Years ago Mark Donohue's wife sued Goodyear over his death. Lots of people thought that it would be the end of racing if she won. As I recall, it was settled out of court (maybe Cossie remembers better than I) with the usual disclaimers and racing continued unabated.

[Scott]

My views on the Bianchi accident I think are known.  But here they are anyway.  I throw the entire blame on the FIA and Charlie Whiting for allowing the tractor on to a dangerous part of a closed racetrack while cars were running at dangerous speed.  The tractor should never have been allowed there unless all the cars were slowed to SC speed (not VSC speed).

The danger wasn't caused by racing in the wet, it wasn't even caused by Bianchi apparently driving faster than he should have been at the time.  The accident was caused when they took a 12 ton tractor and placed it in front of a modern safety barrier.  End of story. 

I think the Bianchi family's only fault is that they are bothering to include the team and the FOM.  Both were just spectators with no control over what happened.  Suing Bernie will only get you a gauntlet of lawyers to grind the lawsuit into the ground.  Marussia is bankrupt and won't have anything to say nor to offer.

IM-not-so-HO Whiting should be fired (should have been right after the event if the FIA really had any interest in protecting itself), and the FIA should be handed punitive damages to be put toward developing safety features preventing anything similar from ever happening again, from simply paying to rent and install cranes to reach every possible corner of every track in the short term, to a permanent, tested and tried head protection system, be-it the windscreen or the halo or something else not yet developed, to written and understood rules for all race directors going forward that nothing, absolutely nothing should be placed between a car at speed and a safety barrier. 

A punitive fine in the neighbourhood of what the FIA charged McLaren for some errant photocopying would do fine. 

[cosworth151]

Years ago Mark Donohue's wife sued Goodyear over his death. Lots of people thought that it would be the end of racing if she won. As I recall, it was settled out of court (maybe Cossie remembers better than I) with the usual disclaimers and racing continued unabated.

As I recall, Donahue's widow won a judgement in state court. Goodyear appealed the verdict and an undisclosed out-of-court settlement was reached.

[John S]

The danger wasn't caused by racing in the wet, it wasn't even caused by Bianchi apparently driving faster than he should have been at the time.  The accident was caused when they took a 12 ton tractor and placed it in front of a modern safety barrier.  End of story. 

I think the Bianchi family's only fault is that they are bothering to include the team and the FOM.  Both were just spectators with no control over what happened.  Suing Bernie will only get you a gauntlet of lawyers to grind the lawsuit into the ground.  Marussia is bankrupt and won't have anything to say nor to offer.

IM-not-so-HO Whiting should be fired (should have been right after the event if the FIA really had any interest in protecting itself), and the FIA should be handed punitive damages to be put toward developing safety features preventing anything similar from ever happening again, from simply paying to rent and install cranes to reach every possible corner of every track in the short term, to a permanent, tested and tried head protection system, be-it the windscreen or the halo or something else not yet developed, to written and understood rules for all race directors going forward that nothing, absolutely nothing should be placed between a car at speed and a safety barrier. 

A punitive fine in the neighbourhood of what the FIA charged McLaren for some errant photocopying would do fine.

I think you're wrong over this Scott and I feel Mike Lawrence writing on pitpass.com explains it much better than I can:- 

   Jules hit a mobile crane and it can be argued that it should not have been where it was. Every circuit has its own topography, therefore its own problems and its own solutions. Suzuka had used mobile cranes for years and I would like to see evidence of any serious objection to the practice before Bianchi's accident. The circuit is not only used for racing throughout the season, but for track days and a racing school.

The second Marussia, driven by Max Chilton, negotiated the same corner, in the same conditions, under the waved yellow flags, but at an appropriate speed. Max finished the race and the car had passed every crash and safety test. The team in the pits cannot control the decisions of a driver on the track.

Jules Bianchi drove too fast for the conditions. That was clear at the time and telemetry bears it out. I can understand his family's distress, but I have no time at all for the blame and compensation culture, it is a pestilence that damages society and it has been largely the creation of ambulance chasing lawyers.

At Suzuka he made a small error, he should have braked a second or so earlier, that is how small the mistake was, but he didn't do that and paid with his life.

Extracts taken from 'High Value' article, courtesy Mike Lawrence pitpass.com, Tues 31st May.

[Scott]

Aside from being enlightened to Mr Lawrence's opinion on punitive lawsuits, I see no new information to sway my opinion.  I don't doubt Bianchi made a mistake, but some make it sound as if he was practically suicidal.  If you want a less biased view, go have a look at the analysis the boys at TheJudge13 did.  Nobody's talking about it because they aren't allowed to.

https://thejudge13.com/2016/06/08/revelations-of-bianchi-accident/

Brilliant quote by Prost - “It is cars and tracks [that have been improved] and there was only one thing left: it was this f*cking truck on the track."

[cosworth151]

There is an old pilots saying that aviation rules are written in blood. It's much the same in racing. Rules often don't get changed until somebody dies. I hope the new "halos" are tested in this type of accident.

I still don't see any justification for the lawsuit. No matter how safe we try to make it, the chance of death is part of being a race driver. Jules knew that and accepted the risks.

[J.Clark]

I am pretty much with Scott on this.

Part of the letter, which I read, suggested the ". . errors were made in the planning, timing, organisation and conduct of the race which took place in dangerous conditions during the typhoon season in Japan."   With no specific clarification, it sounds almost as though the family believes that the FIA (et al) are guilty of planning to - and running - the race under the expected conditions.  That is a bit of a stretch, but I won't go too far down that road.

I seem to recall that following that horrible accident, the discussion in this forum pointed to, among other things, the location of the lights/flags/marshals were part of what contributed to the accident happening.  I still think that is a factor, which would fall on the FIA, Charlie and the circuit, but not FOM or anyone else really.

[Scott]

No matter how safe we try to make it, the chance of death is part of being a race driver. Jules knew that and accepted the risks.

On a closed racetrack with race cars and safety barriers, I completely agree.  Racing is inherently a dangerous sport and every competitor and track worker is responsible for their own wellbeing.  However bringing a tractor onto the track in unsafe conditions with cars at speed takes that right and responsibility out of the equation for me.

[F1fanaticBD]

I agree with Scott here, because if any vehicle which was supposed to be used to exact a damaged vehicle lies in front of the safety barrier, then what is the point of the barrier in the first place? They should either stopped the race or find a way to keep the barrier between the racing cars and moving vehicle for the rescue. I agree with the lawsuit, because I had always felt FIA, the people who were responsible for the safely of the drivers almost got away with an error, so fatal, that it took away one of the most promising driver of this generation.

I hope they should fight with all they have, and should not settle outside court, because this is a fight for the safety of the drivers, it is a matter of principle.

[John S]

I hope they should fight with all they have, and should not settle outside court, because this is a fight for the safety of the drivers, it is a matter of principle.

It's exactly this scenario that worries me, yes of course driver safety is very important but if driver safety is put above all else then I fear for the future of all motorsport. - Driverless cars anyone?

[Scott]

It's exactly this scenario that worries me, yes of course driver safety is very important but if driver safety is put above all else then I fear for the future of all motorsport. - Driverless cars anyone?

Oh come on...ALL I am talking about is intelligent officiating.  Why all the drama about fearing for motorsport?  Motorsport can be exciting and fun, but for the 3-4 minutes per race (more or less, depending on conditions) when a large heavy object must be brought in to tidy things up, the race can be paused by either a SC or some other rule or technology that limits cars to SAFE speeds around the danger areas (I personally don't find the VSC speeds anywhere near SAFE).  Or better yet, a way to extract cars that never requires large heavy tractors to be brought onto a racetrack to begin with.  Why does that lead us to driverless racing?  Do you just wanna punch Whiting on the shoulder and say "Good Job!" when he makes a dangerous mistake, or do you want to correct it?

[Monty]

This is a horrible situation and I'm not judging a family that has lost a very young man.
However, no amount of money will bring him back, plus the sport has taken even more steps to improve safety after the incident. Finally, it was an 'accident'. Jules was driving too fast (the data proved this) and then he was just really unlucky; two metres left or right and he would have survived. There was no negligence or blatant stupidity - just an unlucky accident. It seems wrong to try to 'go legal'.