Alex Palou reveals ‘upset and angry’ reaction to Piastri news in ongoing McLaren lawsuit

Alex Palou testified before the High Court of London to express he felt “upset and angry” after discovering McLaren had signed Oscar Piastri to its Formula 1 team — a seat he believed would be his.

McLaren’s rejection of Palou’s premise, as well as its desire to seek financial compensation from the driver to the tune of $20.7 million, represents the crux of the lawsuit at hand.

Alex Palou: McLaren’s “only attraction” was F1 hopes

Spanish IndyCar champion Alex Palou took the stand Thursday in an ongoing lawsuit against him brought by McLaren Racing.

Back in 2022, Alex Palou inked a contract with McLaren Racing that would have seen him compete for its IndyCar program; his team at the time, Chip Ganassi Racing, disputed Palou’s right to sign a contract with another team and instead exercised its option to extend his contract through the 2023 season.

Palou and CGR settled the dispute, but that meant Palou had to renege on his McLaren contract, a fact that Palou does not deny.

As a result, McLaren is seeking damages of $20.7 million, a sum it has calculated based on lost sponsorship dollars, promotions required of other drivers in the McLaren camp, and the signing bonus given to Palou.

More on the McLaren v. Alex Palou lawsuit:

👉 Major financial details revealed in $30 million McLaren lawsuit against Alex Palou

👉 McLaren at centre of legal action against former driver as London court case begins

Palou’s testimony on Thursday centered around his argument that McLaren had promised him a future in Formula 1, not just IndyCar — claims that McLaren adamantly denies.

As McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown explained in his testimony on Wednesday 8 October, “I never strung along Alex. I never told him he would be under consideration for 2023… there was some optionality to join F1.”

That optionality was described as being back-up plans, in which “Plan B” represented a scenario where Palou waited in the wings at McLaren, able to step in should one of its full-time F1 drivers be injured; and where “Plan C” represented a situation in which rookie Oscar Piastri failed to live up to the team’s standards, at which point Palou would then be tapped for the seat.

Palou alleges that he was assured of an F1 role; McLaren denies his claim.

“I was very upset, worried, and angry that McLaren had signed another rookie driver other than me,” Palou said in his testimony, referring to a September 2022 social media post released by Oscar Piastri in which the Australian driver denied signing with Alpine F1 because he had instead signed a contract with McLaren.

“I asked MIM (Monaco Increase Management, Palou’s management company at the time) to speak to Zak to ask what was going on.

“On September 22 they had a conversation with Zak, and Zak told them they needed someone who would be quick in 2023.”

However, Palou continued, Brown assured MIM that “this would not interfere with my chances to get into F1.”

Brown and McLaren deny this. Further, Palou conceded in court that he had signed his McLaren contract — three years in IndyCar, with the option of serving as reserve driver for the F1 team — two months after the Piastri announcement.

The reigning IndyCar champion noted that his first talks with McLaren took place at the end of 2021, arguing that he instructed his management to tell Zak Brown that his ultimate goal was F1.

“The only attraction was to go to F1,” Palou testified. “My ambition was because it is the biggest single-seater series in the world.”

It wasn’t until October 2022 that Palou stated he began to feel unsure about his future with the F1 team, pointing to a specific dinner with Brown near the McLaren Technology Centre (MTC).

“I went for dinner with Zak at Beaverbrook near MTC,” says Palou’s witness statement.

“Zak told me it was not his decision to hire Oscar. He said it was the decision of the team manager Andreas Seidl.

“Zak told me Piastri’s performance would be evaluated against mine for 2024. Zak said that, from his point of view my chance of getting the F1 seat was not affected by Oscar.

“However, I knew everything had changed. From that point on, I started to be more willing to stay with CGR in the future.”

Brown denied in his own testimony that F1 was ever guaranteed to Palou.

Palou continued to claim, “There had been some rumors in the media about AlphaTauri looking for a F1 driver and my name was in the mix.

“In June 2023 I contacted and had a conversation over the phone with Helmut Marko. Helmut was open to me driving for them, and asked for the conditions of my McLaren release.”

Palou alleges that his representative told Brown of the offer against his wishes, and that “Zak had directly called Helmut, and apparently Helmut had told Zak he was not interested anymore.

“I don’t know what happened in that conversation, but for sure it didn’t help because suddenly Helmut was not interested anymore.”

The veracity of these claims from Palou is yet to be decided in the court. Brown argues that the Spaniard’s announcement that he would be leaving McLaren was as if Palou had “rolled a grenade into the room.”

McLaren points to a deal with sponsor NTT Data that needed to be renegotiated in light of Palou’s departure as being one of the main sources of financial damage suffered by the team; it alleges that the deal with NTT Data hinged in part on the team hiring a driver of Palou’s caliber.

Further, McLaren states that it needed to promote IndyCar driver Pato O’Ward to a Formula 1-adjacent role in Palou’s absence, and that Palou should be held liable for this funding.

McLaren is seeking $7.2 million for the renegotiation with NTT Data, as well as $6.8 million in lost sponsorship revenue from other sources. The O’Ward promotion and the salaries of McLaren’s other drivers cost the team $1.3 million, which has been added to the damages. Further, McLaren is seeking a return of the $400,000 sign-on bonus that Palou received after inking the contract.

“Not only did we lose a championship driver, but we have also been rotating drivers in and out of Alex’s car and dealing with injured drivers all of which has been very disruptive for our racing team,” Brown stated in his testimony.

“We should have been focusing on track performance and finding new sponsors, but you cannot focus on that when you do not know who will be in your car.”

As well as the financial damages, McLaren Racing alleges that Palou caused reputational damage for the team.

Palou will be cross-examined in court beginning on Friday, 10 October. The trial, being presented before Justice Simon Picken, is expected to come to a close in November, with a decision reached by the judge later.

Read next: Evidence destroying allegations, leaked texts: McLaren v Alex Palou lawsuit heats up in court