Audi Wants Tsunoda's Monza Point. The FIA Will Hear the Case November 25.
GOATIFYA Formula 1 point from September is still being contested in November. The FIA has scheduled Audi's challenge to the stewards' Italian Grand Prix decision for November 25 in Paris, reopening the argument over why Yuki Tsunoda was allowed to keep 10th place at Monza.
The incident was not an overtake, a collision or a technical infringement. It came as the field prepared to restart after a red flag. Tsunoda initially steered toward the wrong grid slot, corrected himself and stopped in the proper box, but at an angle that concerned race director Rui Marques. An additional formation lap followed. Audi says that sequence should have required the Racing Bulls driver to start at the end of the pit lane.
Instead, Tsunoda went on to finish 10th, with Audi's Gabriel Bortoleto 11th. The distinction matters because Formula 1 awards a point for 10th and nothing for 11th. Audi's case is not simply that the grid maneuver looked awkward. It is asking the appeals court to decide whether the driver legally caused the extra lap, a question the stewards answered differently on race day.
The Monza restart that triggered an extra lap
The dispute began with a disrupted race. Charles Leclerc's crash on lap two damaged the barriers, forcing a red flag before the field could resume with a standing start. That left drivers to reform on the grid, where the normal choreography suddenly became legally important.
Tsunoda was due to occupy 14th for the restart. As he approached, he first pointed his Racing Bulls toward the neighboring 15th-place slot. He then adjusted course to the right, moving into the correct grid box. The front of his car did not remain beyond the permitted front line, so the issue was not as straightforward as a car stopping outside its assigned rectangle.
Its orientation was still awkward. Race director Rui Marques judged the angle unsafe or unsuitable for an immediate start and called another formation lap. That choice kept the cars circulating rather than immediately sending them off from the grid. What looked like a short procedural delay became an issue once officials asked which actor was responsible for creating it.
Formula 1's account of the stewards' findings describes video checks from several camera angles. Those checks placed the car within its correct grid box despite the late change of direction. The race director told the stewards that the extra lap was his decision because he was uncomfortable starting with the car angled as it was. Crucially, the team was not informed at the time that race control considered its driver responsible for causing another formation lap.
That last point affects what the team could have done. Racing Bulls had not been instructed to divert the car into the pit lane at the end of the additional lap, and Tsunoda took the restart with the rest of the field. He subsequently raced into the final points-paying position. For the stewards, the distinction between a maneuver that prompted concern and the cause specified by the rule was sufficient to take no further action.
GOATIFY
GOATIFY Formula 1
A misread grid slot nearly changed a Formula 1 restart. Follow the finest margins of racing with GOATIFY F1 shirts, hoodies and stickers.
Audi sees the chain differently. Without Tsunoda's late correction and diagonal stopping position, it argues, the extra lap would not have been needed. The appeal therefore asks a court to decide whether the race director's intervention breaks that causal chain or confirms it. It is a narrow disagreement, but the consequences are concrete.
Article B5.9.4 turns on one word: caused
The FIA's November 12 hearing notice identifies the case precisely: ICA-2026-14, Audi's appeal against stewards' Decision No. 69 from the September 6 Italian Grand Prix. The central provision is Article B5.9.4 of the 2026 Formula 1 Sporting Regulations. It addresses a driver who causes an additional formation lap and requires that driver to start from the end of the pit lane.
Under the regulation, failing to take that required start leads to a stop-and-go sanction. Because Tsunoda did not serve such a penalty during the race, the outcome Audi seeks could instead be reflected in a post-race time adjustment. The potential 30-second addition reported in the original race dispute would move Tsunoda down the classification and change who takes the last point.
But the article does not automatically penalize every driver whose car makes the race director hesitate. It requires a judgment about who or what caused the extra formation lap. That is where Audi and the original stewards diverge.
The stewards accepted that Tsunoda ended up in the proper grid box and that the race director made a separate judgment about the safety of launching the field with the car at an angle. Their decision treated the additional lap as the result of that official assessment, rather than the direct regulatory responsibility of car No. 22. Racing Bulls also stressed that no one told the team the driver was considered the cause, denying it the opportunity to take the pit-lane start contemplated by the rule.
Audi's counterargument focuses on what started the sequence. The driver moved toward the wrong place, made an abrupt correction and came to rest unusually. On that interpretation, the director's safety call did not create a new independent cause; it was a reaction to the very positioning error that the regulation was designed to address. A hearing is needed because the written decision and the competing interpretation cannot both determine the same sporting result.
The official FIA notice confirms Audi lodged its appeal on September 9, three days after the race. That puts the November hearing in a formal legal process, not a fresh protest lodged merely because the margin for a point is frustrating. It also means the appeals judges will review the facts and regulation, rather than simply vote on whether the restart looked untidy on television.
Neither the absence of an immediate penalty nor Audi's detailed challenge proves how the court will rule. Race control, the stewards and an independent appeal panel have different functions. The reliable position before November 25 is that the existing classification stands while the appeal is unresolved.
What Bortoleto could gain — and what happens on November 25
The possible change is small in absolute points but unusually clear in sporting terms. Tsunoda was classified 10th at the Italian Grand Prix, earning one point. Bortoleto finished immediately behind in 11th and scored none. A 30-second addition to Tsunoda's race time, if imposed after the appeal and applied as described in the reports, would drop him to 15th and lift Bortoleto into 10th. That would transfer the final points position from Racing Bulls to Audi.
GOATIFY
GOATIFY Formula 1
A split-second correction has become a regulatory battle. Browse GOATIFY Formula 1 fan gear while the appeal heads to Paris.
It would not mean Bortoleto suddenly overtook Tsunoda on the track. The Brazilian's drive and the car's pace would remain exactly what they were in September. The classification would change because the governing body applied a penalty to the result. These after-the-fact changes often feel counterintuitive, especially when several race weekends have passed, but the purpose of an appeal is to test whether the original regulatory decision was lawful and consistent.
Audi has a sporting reason to pursue that distinction. Monza was one of the circuits where the manufacturer believed a points finish was within reach during its first Formula 1 season. Bortoleto had missed the final part of qualifying by just one thousandth of a second, a measure of how tight its midfield contest was even before Sunday's restart. Losing the final points spot by one classification position left a tangible prize to dispute, not just a matter of principle.
The upcoming session is scheduled for 09:00 on Wednesday, November 25, 2026, at FIA premises on Place de la Concorde in Paris. The FIA says it will be held behind closed doors at its request and by decision of the panel, so the public and media cannot attend. A published decision will follow as soon as practicable after the hearing. There is no published ruling yet.
That timeline is important when reading headlines between now and the hearing. The FIA's November 12 update confirms when Audi's complaint will be examined; it does not grant the appeal, overturn Decision No. 69 or remove Tsunoda's point. His result remains the established classification for now. Nor does a scheduled hearing necessarily imply that the legal question is already settled in Audi's favor.
The appeal could also matter beyond those two drivers. Teams and race officials need to know how consistently Article B5.9.4 separates a driver-induced extra lap from a race director's discretionary decision to order one for safety. A clear ruling would help define when a team must anticipate a pit-lane restart, when race control must communicate the reason, and how stewards treat an unusual grid position that remains technically within the painted lines.
For racing fans, the key date is November 25, not the original September checkered flag. Audi can still win a single point on paper; Racing Bulls can still defend the result it earned on track. The court must decide which interpretation of the restart rule applies to the same, already documented moment.
Audi's case is ultimately about responsibility. Tsunoda corrected into the right grid box, but the unusual angle of his Racing Bulls triggered an additional formation lap. The stewards viewed the director's safety decision as decisive; Audi says the driver's actions were the trigger the regulation covers.
The FIA has confirmed a closed November 25 hearing, not a verdict. Until the appeal panel issues its decision, Tsunoda keeps his Monza 10th place and Bortoleto remains 11th. Whether a single point changes hands will depend on how the court interprets caused in Article B5.9.4 — a subtle word with a measurable sporting consequence.
GOATIFY
GOATIFY Formula 1
Shop GOATIFY Formula 1 shirts, hoodies and racing stickers.
