Robert Ebert: Top banker jailed for fatal crash in Hong Kong wants to sue Ferrari for millions over brake failure

A senior British banker who spent 14 months in a Hong Kong prison after fatally running over a security guard is trying to sue Ferrari for millions in damages, claiming his supercar’s brakes failed.

Robert Ebert was making millions as head of equities for Deutsche Bank’s Asia Pacific region when he bumped into Ku Lap-chi on his way to work in June 2015.

Mr Ebert claimed it was an accident and that the Ferrari 458 Spider’s brakes had failed, but a Ferrari employee gave an expert report in court that brake failure was “impossible”.

The London-born banker was found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving and was sentenced to 22 months in prison, of which he served 14 months. He was later deported after his release.

He is now considering suing the Italian supercar maker for millions of pounds and says thousands of Ferraris, including his own car, have subsequently been recalled for similar braking problems he claims to have experienced.

On Tuesday, he launched a preliminary hearing at the High Court in London to force Ferrari to release documents which he said would help him “establish exactly what knowledge Ferrari had in relation to these matters” during the hearing “for the purpose of bringing legal action against Ferrari”.

Making his case before Mrs Justice O’Farrell, his barrister Andrew Butler KC said: “Mr Ebert, a British national who was then 48, was a successful banker working in Hong Kong.

“On June 9, 2015, while driving to work in his Ferrari 458 Spider, he lost control. His car went off the road and collided with a security guard named Mr. Ku Lap-chi, and he tragically lost his life as a result of the accident.

“Despite claiming from the beginning that the 458’s brakes were not working, Mr. Ebert was charged with causing death by dangerous driving in Hong Kong.

“Ferrari sent a representative, Mr. Martino Casolari, to the hearing to testify to the prosecution. The content of Mr. Casolari’s statement was that Mr. Ebert’s experience with the 458’s brakes was scientifically impossible, given the complexity of Ferrari’s braking system.

“Mr. Ebert was found guilty and sentenced to 22 months in prison in Hong Kong and sentenced to 14 months in prison. Mr. Casolari’s testimony was a significant factor in the conviction.”

He was later deported to England upon his release, the lawyer said.

“This would have been a terrible event in anyone’s life, but it was especially costly for Mr. Ebert. At that point, Deutsche Bank’s head of equities and joint global equities sales for the Asia Pacific region had died.”

“He was making between $2.5 million and $5 million a year and was promoted to a role that would earn him between $6 million and $7 million. The role he was inexorably advancing into required a salary of between $8 million and $11 million.

“As a result of the conviction, he lost that position and indeed his job as a whole.”

The lawyer said the former banker now earns around £80,000 a year running his own financial services firm in the UK, but “is hampered by his conviction having been refused entry to several countries, including Hong Kong, the US, Canada, where his wife’s family resides, and Australia and New Zealand, where most of his own family reside”.

“Even at the time of Mr. Ebert’s conviction, unbeknownst to him, there was traffic on Ferrari chat sites questioning the effectiveness of the brakes on models such as the 458.

“In October 2021, Ferrari recalled certain vehicle models, including the 458, in the United States as a result of a detected fault in the braking systems.

“They later recalled more than 2,000 vehicles in China in 2022, the recall covers 458 vehicles and also covers vehicles imported between March 2010 and March 2019, again due to a detected fault in their brake systems. The announcement mentioned ‘a brake reservoir fluid cap that has failed to vent properly.’

“Mr. Ebert’s vehicle was manufactured in February 2012 and was one of those recalled.

“The purpose of this pre-trial disclosure application is for Mr. Ebert to establish exactly what knowledge Ferrari had regarding these matters at the time of Mr. Ebert’s hearing, for the purpose of bringing a lawsuit against Ferrari.”

However, Tim Otty KC, on behalf of Ferrari, told the judge that the supercar company had resisted the application. He claimed the former banker was trying to bypass proper legal procedure and that any application for the release of evidence should be made in Hong Kong or Italy, not London.

“The proposed claim arises from the fatal traffic accident Mr. Ebert was involved in while driving a Ferrari 458 Spider in Hong Kong on June 9, 2015,” he said.

“Mr. Ebert’s evidence in the criminal case was that the accident was caused by a brake failure in the vehicle. Mr. Martino Casolari, a Ferrari employee, testified at the hearing regarding the vehicle’s braking system, at the request of the Hong Kong police.

“The court did not accept Mr. Ebert’s testimony, he was found guilty and sentenced to 14 months in prison.

“Several years later, in October 2021, Ferrari made the decision to recall certain classes of vehicles, including the Mr. Ebert’s Vehicle class, for brake-related defects.

“Mr. Ebert alleges that the same brake-related defects caused the accident, that Ferrari knew or should have known of these alleged defects, and that Mr. Casolari gave false, misleading and/or negligent statements at trial, ultimately leading to Mr. Ebert’s conviction and various alleged consequential losses.

“Ferrari denies that the recall had anything to do with the accident or Mr. Ebert’s conviction.

“By the application for pre-litigation disclosure, Mr Ebert seeks disclosure of various categories of documents said to be relevant to Ferrari’s state of knowledge at the relevant date regarding the alleged braking defects that caused the accident in Mr Ebert’s case.

“The application for pre-trial disclosure represents an improper attempt to circumvent the letter of request procedure, which is the appropriate mechanism for obtaining documents held abroad by a foreign defendant in accordance with the principles of international comity.

“It would be more appropriate for Mr. Ebert to file a lawsuit and seek clarification in Hong Kong or Italy.”

The trial continues.