The UIM International Court of Appeal has delivered a landmark ruling that annuls a race jury decision from the F4 World Championship and establishes new precedent on jury impartiality.
William Martinsen, competing for Black Pharaoh Racing, successfully appealed a one-lap penalty imposed following Race 2 at Mons on August 24, 2025. The ICA not only reduced his sanction to a loss of two positions but also ruled the original jury decision invalid due to a breach of impartiality requirements.
Procedural Violations Found
The three-judge panel, comprising Prof. Bruno Tassone (President), Prof. Ignazio Castellucci and Prof. Rostam Neuwirth, determined that one jury member had a familial relationship to another driver whose championship standing could be indirectly affected by the penalty decision. The jury vote was decided 3-2, making the potentially interested member’s participation decisive.
The court applied Rule 402.02, which prohibits jury members who have “directly or indirectly an interest in one of the parties involved” from judging protests. The ICA interpreted “interest” broadly, noting that even the appearance of possible bias is sufficient grounds for annulment when a member’s vote could influence the outcome.
This builds on the court’s earlier decision in ICA case 6/2023, which established that when a minority of jury members have such an interest, appellants must demonstrate the decision “was or could have been the outcome of such an (individual) interest.” With the jury split 3-2, the panel found this threshold clearly met.
Governance Recommendations
The ICA issued a strong warning about the practice, stating in its decision: “The Panel points out at the fact that allowing juries to be composed by members related to the drivers is very harmful for the image of UIM, and recommends UIM to take appropriate action to avoid similar situations in the future.”
The court ordered its decision be notified to the UIM Executive Committee and recommended implementing explicit conflict-of-interest protocols similar to those governing ICA judges themselves.
Frode Sundsdal, Black Pharaoh Team Sporting Director, said:
It was important for us to protest the jury’s decision. It was wrong, as the ICA has now confirmed, and, more importantly, the ruling sets a clear precedent for the future: no family member should serve on a jury.
I’m pretty sure there are quite a few drivers tonight thinking back to jury hearings they lost and realising the panel that disqualified them may not even have been properly constituted. The ICA was very clear. In F4, the matter was decided directly, and there is now a Protest Judge in place, something that should be standard across all UIM classes.
Substantive Ruling on Rule 307.02
Despite annulling the jury decision on procedural grounds, the ICA exercised its authority under Rule 405.09 to decide the merits of the case and avoid delay. The panel reviewed drone footage showing Martinsen moving slightly inward approaching the first turning buoy while maintaining his lane during the initial acceleration phase.
The court confirmed a technical breach of Rule 307.02 occurred but found the one-lap penalty disproportionate. The rule establishes graduated sanctions: disqualification for manoeuvres causing accidents or serious damage, one-lap penalties for clear advantage or obstruction, and loss of two positions for simply failing to maintain the relative starting lane.
The panel found “no evidence that the Appellant obtains a clear or quantifiable advantage by moving slightly inward, nor that his manoeuvre creates a safety risk for other drivers.” The ICA emphasised that Rule 307.02 must be applied substantively rather than formalistically, focusing on actual competitive advantage and safety risks.
The decision states: “Rule 307.02 is not to be applied in a strictly literal fashion, but rather through a careful and context-sensitive assessment based on three fundamental elements: safety, the absence of advantage or risk to other drivers, and the proportionality of the sanction.”
Implications
The verdict, issued October 6, 2025, with full reasons published November 3, establishes two significant precedents. First, it creates an “appearance of bias” test for jury composition, potentially affecting how race officials are selected across UIM championships. Second, it reinforces a proportionality-based approach to Rule 307.02 enforcement, requiring clear evidence of advantage or danger to justify one-lap penalties.
The appellant’s fee has been returned, and championship standings will be adjusted to reflect the reduced two-position penalty rather than the original one-lap sanction.
John Moore’s involvement in powerboat racing began in 1981 when he competed in his first offshore powerboat race. After a career as a Financial Futures broker in the City of London, specialising in UK interest rate markets, he became actively involved in event organisation and powerboat racing journalism.
He served as Event Director for the Cowes–Torquay–Cowes races between 2010 and 2013. In 2016, he launched Powerboat Racing World, a digital platform providing global powerboat racing news and insights. The following year, he co-founded UKOPRA, helping to rejuvenate offshore racing in the United Kingdom. He sold Powerboat Racing World in late 2021 and remained actively involved with UKOPRA until 2025.
In 2025, he established Powerboat News, returning to independent journalism with a focus on neutral and comprehensive coverage of the sport.
