Palou vs McLaren: what the High Court in London heard
Alex Palou has told London’s High Court he was sold a dream 'based on lies' by McLaren CEO Zak Brown, as the Spaniard defended his decision to walk away from a signed commitment to join the team’s IndyCar programme. Palou has admitted breaching his agreement but denies ever stringing McLaren along, insisting he would have fulfilled the project had a Formula 1 seat materialised.
Key contracts and milestones
According to evidence presented, Palou signed an initial agreement with McLaren on 4 March 2022 that included an option, but not an obligation, for a 2024 F1 seat. That seat ultimately went to Oscar Piastri in 2023, prompting Palou to reassess his future. A subsequent contract covering 2024 to 2026, with a team option for 2027, was signed on 1 October 2022.
Palou met with Zak Brown the day after the 2023 Indy 500, telling him he wanted a fair-market value salary after receiving a fresh proposal from Ganassi. As the summer progressed, McLaren pushed to move the project forward.
The disputed Nashville announcement
At the Nashville round on 6 August 2023, Brown was keen to organise a press conference with NTT Data, the primary sponsor of Palou’s No. 10 Ganassi car, to announce a 2024 move to McLaren. Under cross-examination, Palou said he never had any conversation about joining such a press conference and rejected Brown’s account that he was excited to discuss the announcement with his visiting parents. Brown, present in court, was seen laughing and shaking his head at that claim.
Why Palou changed course
Palou testified that doubts grew once the F1 path appeared blocked. He cancelled a planned meeting with Brown over the Nashville weekend while his lawyers prepared formal notice of breach. McLaren’s legal team was informed on Tuesday, 8 August 2023.
Search for an F1 alternative
Pressed on whether Brown tried to help him find a different F1 route, Palou said Brown contacted Williams boss James Vowles and spoke with Red Bull advisor Helmut Marko. Palou stated Marko was initially interested but, following the call, was no longer interested.
Preparation programme under scrutiny
McLaren highlighted the extensive preparation it provided Palou: simulator work and TPC running in Barcelona, Hungary and Austria. Asked repeatedly if he benefited, Palou said the programme helped him learn McLaren’s systems before an FP1 outing at the 2022 United States Grand Prix, but was not beneficial for him as a racing driver. After a prompt from presiding judge Mr Justice Picken, Palou clarified the systems-learning benefit.
Other testimony and what comes next
Chip Ganassi Racing managing director Mike Hull also gave evidence. When asked if a letter from Ganassi’s lawyers to McLaren was threatening, he declined to characterise it; Mr Justice Picken deemed the response adequate and moved on. The case is set to pause for a week from Monday 13 October, resume on Monday 20 October, with final arguments expected the week of Monday 3 November.
At the heart of the dispute are credibility and expectations: Palou maintains he never agreed to a staged announcement and was misled about his trajectory, while McLaren argues the driver reneged after extensive investment in his F1 preparation.
