Call us today0800 160 1298
 
 

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Appeal Refusal is the Next Step in VW ‘Dieselgate’ Class Action Litigation

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 601
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

A recent decision by the Court of Appeal now means that car making giants Volkswagen will not be able to appeal the decision that it did circumvent EU clean air regulations. The decision is a key preliminary issue in the current class action the German manufacturer is facing.


Volkswagen, the world’s largest car manufacturer measured in number of vehicles sold, is facing class action litigation from over 90,000 UK customers who are claiming that the Wolfsburg based manufacturer had deceived them as to their vehicles’ conformity with EU emissions regulations and true value. The claimants argue that their vehicles were fitted with devices (sometimes referred to a ‘defeat devices’) that knew when the vehicle was being tested and adjusted the engine performance and subsequent emissions in line with the regulations, whilst when tested under normal driving conditions, the harmful nitrogen oxide (‘NoXx’) emissions were often above the permitted levels. So far Volkswagen have refused to compensate owners in England and wales, despite having paid out billions of dollars in fines and compensation in other countries.

Contradictory Evidence

Volkswagen had argued that it did not install a ‘defeat device’ that was specifically prohibited by European law, but Appeal Court judge Waksman J found that it was, describing various VW’s arguments as “completely irrelevant’, “hopeless”, “highly flawed” and absurd. Wakeman also stated that VW’s own internal documents contradicted its defence in court:

A software function which enables a vehicle to pass the test because (artificially) it operates the vehicle in a way which is bound to pass the test and in which it does not operate on the road is a fundamental subversion of the test and the objective behind it..in other words, it destroys the utility of the test because it makes it impossible for performance under it to be the approximation of normal driving conditions and performance which it is intended to be.”

A spokesperson for Leigh Day, who along with Slater & Gordon are the joint lead solicitors in the group action said:

The legal action against Volkswagen can now proceed and it also blackens the clouds over the headquarters of many other vehicle manufacturers who may have felt that cheating the system was good for business…we believe that drivers in this country are owed many millions, if not billions, of pounds after they were mis-sold cars which had far greater emissions than they were led to believe, causing much more harm to the environment and increasing fuel consumption…“Volkswagen should now accept the court’s decision and we urge them to now do the right thing and put their customers first by entering into settlement negotiations so that our clients are not forced to drag them further through the courts.”

Commenting on the decision, a VW spokeswoman said:

Volkswagen Group is disappointed in the Court of Appeal’s decision but, of course, respects it… Volkswagen maintains that because customers have not suffered any loss, it does not owe them compensation. Nevertheless, this is a matter for the main trial in due course…Volkswagen has openly acknowledged that, in relation to the emissions issue, we did not live up to our own standards. We are committed to maintaining the trust of the public through programmes such as our €33bn investment into e-mobility, bringing 75 fully electric car models to market by 2029.”

 

Commercial Litigation Funding

If you are thinking about taking legal action against another individual or company but are worried about the costs involved, Advantage Litigation Services have the skills and expertise to help you find a way of funding commercial litigation without risking your personal finances or those of your business. Click here to contact us today or call 0800 160 1298 to see how we can help.

Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • Following recent Supreme Court rulings in two professional negligence cases, the Court has outlined a “wholly new legal roadmap” for professional negligence claims made in England and Wales. As a result, the Professional Negligence Lawyers Association (PNLA) have said that existing claims will now need to be reviewed, stating that “for many there could be a substantial impact on the likely chances of success and the assessment of financial loss”.The cases in question are Khan v Meadows [2021] and Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021]. The first case centred on whether a medical expert, who failed to diagnose that a mother carried the haemophilia gene, was liable for the costs associated with her son’s autism as well as his haemophilia, whilst the second case concerned whether accountants Grant Thornton were liable for the costs of a building society... Read More

  • A recently failed business claim that was dismissed at court has once again highlighted the many pitfalls and legal complexities facing litigants in person (LIPs – that is, individuals taking legal action without professional representation from a solicitor or barrister). The claim in question - Daly & Anr v Ryan & Anr. 2021 - concerned an individual businessman who had a costly judgment entered against him simply because he had repeatedly failed to abide by the rules. Read More

  • Latest statistics from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), who are responsible for the regulation of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales, confirm what many in the profession have been predicting for a while; that law firms are accelerating the consolidation process as they begin to embrace new ways of working. Read More