Formula 1:McLaren has been accused of blatant opportunism in their bid to see Lewis Hamilton crowned this year's Formula One world champion.
In the run-up to the Court of Appeal hearing into the 'cool fuel' row, McLaren officials - including Hamilton - insisted they did not want to win the title in the courtroom.
Yet that was in stark contrast to the submissions of lawyer, Ian Mill QC, who called for a reclassification of the championship.
That led to a sharp retort from Ferrari's legal representative, Nigel Tozzi QC, defending the interests of the team and of Kimi Raikkonen who claimed the crown on the track.
"This is not the way a Formula One world championship should be won," insisted Tozzi towards the end of the four-hour tribunal, with a verdict due tomorrow.
"Mr Hamilton himself, potentially the only beneficiary, has said very clearly he does not want to win the championship this way.
"Mr Norbert Haug, head of Mercedes motorsport, has again gone on the record and said McLaren are not appealing in order to claim the championship.
"Mr Martin Whitmarsh (McLaren F1 CEO) in an interview yesterday said 'finding a way to award the world drivers' championship to Lewis retrospectively, is not at all what this is about'.
"It could be said McLaren are shameless hypocrites devoid of any integrity, or maybe what their representatives have said should be taken at face value.
"If what they want is clarity, then by all means let them have that, but do not allow them to have the world championship this way.
"It would be a serious injustice to Mr Raikkonen should the world title be taken away from him, a fact recognised by Mr Hamilton and Mr (Fernando) Alonso."
On the evidence presented, it appears extremely unlikely Hamilton will be handed the title, so bringing the curtain down on the most dramatic of seasons.
McLaren had appealed the verdict of the stewards at the season-ending Brazilian Grand Prix not to punish BMW Sauber and Williams for fuel irregularities.
Hamilton could only finish seventh behind race-winner Raikkonen at Interlagos, missing out on the championship by a point.
If the four judges presiding over the case opt to disqualify Nico Rosberg, Robert Kubica and Nick Heidfeld, who finished fourth, fifth and sixth respectively, they could also opt to promote Hamilton up the order, so handing him the title.
Mill pointed to 26 instances in Formula One history where there had been disqualifications and a championship reclassification.
"We offer no special plea on behalf of the team, but I ask you to do what normally happens," said Mill. "It's clear the infringement of this rule did have a performance- enhancing effect. If you put in cool fuel it increases the horse power.
"The principle is clear: if there was a performance enhancement, there was a breach and there has to be a disqualification.
"I ask you to address this as though it was any team at any stage of the season."
Tozzi, however, argued against such an outcome, stating: "It would be highly damaging for the sport if the title were to be won this way.
"The fans would probably feel it had been achieved by grubby manoeuvring by the lawyers rather than by skill on the track."
The four judges - John Cassidy from the United States, Vassilis Koussis from Greece, Jose Nacedo E Cunha from Portugal and Jan Stovicek from the Czech Republic - will initially determine if McLaren's case is admissible.
If there is a case to answer, then they will look at the arguments surrounding the temperature of the fuel used in the BMW Sauber and William cars and whether there was a performance advantage.
Should the two teams be found guilty, only then will any potential sanction be imposed, and there be a prospect of the championship classification being reviewed.