2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[Vanja #66]

Still waiting for an answer on this conundrum

What stops Ferrari NV in Netherlands or Ferrari SpA hiring Newey directly and "keep" him away from F1 projects? What would stop them to put him in casual Ferrari clothes and bring him as Team's guest each weekend?

[Joel709]

Not only the uk government intends to limit non competes to 3 months.

It’s totally not true that a trial would take a year or longer, lol.

But ultimately he would work for Ferrari so it’s something to be dealt with across country lines so the matter is very much more complicated.

Trials take forever.

Also while they may be true, it isn’t true now and isn’t law so isn’t relevant.

Also, he’s employed under a U.K. based entity, therefore his contract would entirely fall under U.K. law.

Laws are there for both employee and employer, employers can lose a lot too.

[Joel709]

Still waiting for an answer on this conundrum

What stops Ferrari NV in Netherlands or Ferrari SpA hiring Newey directly and "keep" him away from F1 projects? What would stop them to put him in casual Ferrari clothes and bring him as Team's guest each weekend?

The amount of auditing that happens in F1 wouldn’t allow this to happen, it’s so difficult to get around anything, they can probably hire him for other series like GT but even they wouldn’t dare let him have influence on F1 until things were legal

[ringo]

Newey is not an employee of redbull .he is hired through his company worked on suspension elements.

Could the fact he is not an employee create a loop hole for him to leave the team and forego gardening leave?
I dont think his contract is as tight as the drivers'.

[Joel709]

Newey is not an employee of redbull .he is hired through his company worked on suspension elements.

Could the fact he is not an employee create a loop hole for him to leave the team and forego gardening leave?
I dont think his contract is as tight as the drivers'.

No as the contract he signed contained Non Comp clauses so it affects him regardless

[ringo]

Are you sure that is in his contract?

From reading this forum, it would seem Newey is not hired by redbull as Adrian Newey, but through a company.
The company has liability but not Adrian the individual.
Newey can simply quit the company hired by redbull. The company can either continue its realtionship with RBR or terminate, and havd nothing to do with Newey.
And then again whay if there is no such thing as a no compete clause for Adrian?

Another contract clause i want to mention is Max's. I do not think it's contingent on Marko. It would be dumb of Horner to hinge Max's contract on an 80 year old man that can kick the bucket any minute. This whole i go if Marko goes thing just seems like an extremely weak guarantee for Redbull.
Might as well Max sign the contract with fading ink. So yeah, I truly doubt that Marko clause.

[organic]

The Marko clause was apparently put in by Verstappen/Marko unbeknownst to Horner. Story came out a couple months ago through the usual sources which are reliable for RB news

And once that broke the rumours around Marko being removed from RB calmed down as well. Funny that

[Henk_v]

Non compete clauses can be written to be enforcable.

Under many local laws, you cannot reasonably impair another company from doing business. If there's a secrecy clause, most judges will rule the non compete can't refrain you from working at x company as your skillset kinda forces you to work with a competitor, you must be allowed to make a living and you've signed clauses to keep any information propriatary to your former employer secret. Therefore you can reason that the non compete is unreasonable.

This works when you are just a gear in the machine, but stuff changes if you possess unique knowledge or skill.

A non compete clause can be augmented with a clause that says that you agree the non compete is reasonable. This trick is used a lot.

You therefore cannot go to a judge asking him to dismiss the non compete because it is unreasonable.

[Wouter]

These are the crucial questions raised by the news about Adrian Newey

If Adrian Newey actually decides to leave Red Bull after this Formula 1 season, what are the implications for that team, the competition and F1 as a whole? Some crucial questions at a glance.

For example, with today's knowledge, Verstappen already said very interesting words in Suzuka when this site asked him about Newey.
"I can of course say that everything should stay together, but if someone wants to leave, you can't always stop them."
Verstappen chose his words carefully. During the media day for the Japanese Grand Prix, no immediate explanation was given, but with the current reports, Verstappen's words are of course in a slightly different light. The same applies to earlier statements by Jos Verstappen that the team could fall apart if the internal unrest continues.

A crucial note in all of this is that Red Bull Racing first wants to talk to Newey next week in response to all the reporting to see whether something can still be possible with his concerns and reservations.

Question 1: To what extent will Red Bull be affected if Newey actually leaves?
------------------------------------------
Question 2: When will a possible effect be felt?
-------------------------------------------
Question 3: What are the options for Newey if he really leaves Red Bull?
-------------------------------------------
Question 4: Does a departure affect other key players at Red Bull?
-------------------------------------------

.
https://nl.motorsport.com/f1/news/dit-z ... /10603548/

[ringo]

Non compete clauses can be written to be enforcable.

Under many local laws, you cannot reasonably impair another company from doing business. If there's a secrecy clause, most judges will rule the non compete can't refrain you from working at x company as your skillset kinda forces you to work with a competitor, you must be allowed to make a living and you've signed clauses to keep any information propriatary to your former employer secret. Therefore you can reason that the non compete is unreasonable.

This works when you are just a gear in the machine, but stuff changes if you possess unique knowledge or skill.

A non compete clause can be augmented with a clause that says that you agree the non compete is reasonable. This trick is used a lot.

You therefore cannot go to a judge asking him to dismiss the non compete because it is unreasonable.

This is dejavu for Dan Fallows isnt it?
Didn't we have a similar discussion when he left redbull? And he didnt stay away from F1 for long either. Correct me if I am wrong.

[Joel709]

Non compete clauses can be written to be enforcable.

Under many local laws, you cannot reasonably impair another company from doing business. If there's a secrecy clause, most judges will rule the non compete can't refrain you from working at x company as your skillset kinda forces you to work with a competitor, you must be allowed to make a living and you've signed clauses to keep any information propriatary to your former employer secret. Therefore you can reason that the non compete is unreasonable.

This works when you are just a gear in the machine, but stuff changes if you possess unique knowledge or skill.

A non compete clause can be augmented with a clause that says that you agree the non compete is reasonable. This trick is used a lot.

You therefore cannot go to a judge asking him to dismiss the non compete because it is unreasonable.

This is dejavu for Dan Fallows isnt it?
Didn't we have a similar discussion when he left redbull? And he didnt stay away from F1 for long either. Correct me if I am wrong.

Very similar yes, he had to serve a years gardening leave if I’m not mistaken, I think it was found out about half way through that he was leaving

[organic]

Newey is apparently set for talks with the team about his future

Interestingly

The Guardian understands that Red Bull’s chief technical officer is yet to formally tender his resignation or announce to staff that he will be leaving and insiders say the headlines caught Newey and the team by surprise on Thursday.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/ ... ormula-one

[Dunlay]

Non compete clauses can be written to be enforcable.

Under many local laws, you cannot reasonably impair another company from doing business. If there's a secrecy clause, most judges will rule the non compete can't refrain you from working at x company as your skillset kinda forces you to work with a competitor, you must be allowed to make a living and you've signed clauses to keep any information propriatary to your former employer secret. Therefore you can reason that the non compete is unreasonable.

This works when you are just a gear in the machine, but stuff changes if you possess unique knowledge or skill.

A non compete clause can be augmented with a clause that says that you agree the non compete is reasonable. This trick is used a lot.

You therefore cannot go to a judge asking him to dismiss the non compete because it is unreasonable.

This is dejavu for Dan Fallows isnt it?
Didn't we have a similar discussion when he left redbull? And he didnt stay away from F1 for long either. Correct me if I am wrong.

The matter went to the court and Aston had to strike a settlement with Red Bull to release him. Gardening leave was enforceable in his case too.

https://www.wallace.co.uk/articles/wall ... to%20trial.

In October 2021, Red Bull commenced High Court proceedings against Mr Fallows in respect of the dispute. The case was listed for an expedited trial to take place three months later beginning on 24 January 2022.

The parties reached a settlement just days before the matter was to go to trial.

Martin Whitmarsh, Group Chief Executive Officer of Aston Martin Performance Technologies, said: "We are pleased to have reached an agreement with Red Bull which releases Dan early from his contract and are looking forward to him joining the team."

[dialtone]

Non compete clauses can be written to be enforcable.

Under many local laws, you cannot reasonably impair another company from doing business. If there's a secrecy clause, most judges will rule the non compete can't refrain you from working at x company as your skillset kinda forces you to work with a competitor, you must be allowed to make a living and you've signed clauses to keep any information propriatary to your former employer secret. Therefore you can reason that the non compete is unreasonable.

This works when you are just a gear in the machine, but stuff changes if you possess unique knowledge or skill.

A non compete clause can be augmented with a clause that says that you agree the non compete is reasonable. This trick is used a lot.

You therefore cannot go to a judge asking him to dismiss the non compete because it is unreasonable.

This is dejavu for Dan Fallows isnt it?
Didn't we have a similar discussion when he left redbull? And he didnt stay away from F1 for long either. Correct me if I am wrong.

The matter went to the court and Aston had to strike a settlement with Red Bull to release him. Gardening leave was enforceable in his case too.

https://www.wallace.co.uk/articles/wall ... to%20trial.

In October 2021, Red Bull commenced High Court proceedings against Mr Fallows in respect of the dispute. The case was listed for an expedited trial to take place three months later beginning on 24 January 2022.

The parties reached a settlement just days before the matter was to go to trial.

Martin Whitmarsh, Group Chief Executive Officer of Aston Martin Performance Technologies, said: "We are pleased to have reached an agreement with Red Bull which releases Dan early from his contract and are looking forward to him joining the team."

They settled for earlier leave, how was this proof of enforceability?

[Dunlay]

This is dejavu for Dan Fallows isnt it?
Didn't we have a similar discussion when he left redbull? And he didnt stay away from F1 for long either. Correct me if I am wrong.

The matter went to the court and Aston had to strike a settlement with Red Bull to release him. Gardening leave was enforceable in his case too.

https://www.wallace.co.uk/articles/wall ... to%20trial.

In October 2021, Red Bull commenced High Court proceedings against Mr Fallows in respect of the dispute. The case was listed for an expedited trial to take place three months later beginning on 24 January 2022.

The parties reached a settlement just days before the matter was to go to trial.

Martin Whitmarsh, Group Chief Executive Officer of Aston Martin Performance Technologies, said: "We are pleased to have reached an agreement with Red Bull which releases Dan early from his contract and are looking forward to him joining the team."

They settled for earlier leave, how was this proof of enforceability?

They went to the court! You don't go to court for a losing cause.

I would like to believe Red Bull has qualified real world legal counsel, not Internet experts.