Dieselgate, because the sentence of the EU Court of Justice is smoke and mirrors for Mercedes
After a German administrative sentence that risks costing the main car manufacturers in and around Berlin a lot, the Court of Justice also breaks into the dieselgate with a straight leg
Everyone knows the date that served as a watershed, even those who don't own a car: September 18, 2015. That day the VW dieselgate scandal broke out, capable of simultaneously overwhelming Germany's main industry as well as the so-called "d 'Europe".
Despite the efforts made by the Wolfsburg-based company, which is not by chance among the European companies most convinced to embrace electric motorization, at least until the arrival of the new CEO, that word still remains stuck on it today, although there have been numerous manufacturers, at each latitude, from Japan (the Hino scandal was equally serious yet did not have the same media coverage) to the USA, to have engaged in similar, if not even more serious, conduct.
HOW THE DIESELGATE WAS BORN
It all started in the USA (someone said that for some time they had been looking for a way to attack Berlin, which at the same time was expanding its relations with Moscow with NordStream2), where the Environmental Protection Agency had found that Volkswagen had illegally installed a software in the control unit, programmed to circumvent the environmental standards on NOx (nitrogen oxide) emissions of its diesel cars, which at the time complied with Euro 5 legislation. The software was programmed to detect when the car was being tested, activating a reduction in performance and related emissions, so as to pass the conformity exams. The dieselgate had exploded.
VICTORY FOR ENVIRONMENTALISTS AGAINST VW IN GERMANY
Almost 8 years have passed, yet there is still talk of dieselgate. Not even last month, in Germany, where it all began, the administrative court of Schleswig-Holstein ruled in favor of the environmental organization Deutsche Umwelthilfe (Duh), declaring the software update carried out by Volkswagen after the 'explosion of the scandal, overturning a previous contrary verdict of 2017 which gave against the requests of environmentalists.
Duh, as fierce as ever after this unexpected ruling, has already said she won't stop there and, on the strength of the 'precedent', intends to start new lawsuits against the Kraftfahrtbundesamt (Kba, the transport supervisory authority, counterpart of our motorization civil law) contesting similar authorizations granted to Mercedes and BMW. If successful, the three German manufacturers risk having to initiate the recall of at least ten million vehicles.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE AGAINST MERCEDES
A grain of no small importance for the German automotive industry which, with the final judgment, would cause new economic damage. And it is not the only one received from a courtroom. Indeed, in the last few hours, the Court of Justice of the European Union, ruling on an appeal for compensation for damages brought by a citizen against the Mercedes-Benz Group, ruled that the purchaser of a motor vehicle equipped with a defeat device tort benefits from a right to compensation from the car manufacturer if the system has caused damage to the buyer.
"In addition to the general interests, EU law also protects the particular interests of the individual purchaser of a motor vehicle against the manufacturer if that vehicle is equipped with a prohibited defeat device", argue the judges in the ruling which risks costing a lot to German manufacturers. The Court concluded that the framework directive establishes a direct link between the car manufacturer and the individual purchaser of a motor vehicle to ensure that the vehicle complies with the relevant EU law.
The Court considers that the provisions of the framework directive, in conjunction with those of regulation no. 715/2007 , protects, in addition to general interests, the particular interests of the individual purchaser of a motor vehicle against the manufacturer if this vehicle is equipped with a prohibited defeat device.
WHAT MEMBER STATES CAN DO
Member States are required to provide that the purchaser of such a vehicle is entitled to compensation from its manufacturer. In the absence of provisions of EU law governing the methods of compensation, it is up to each of the 27 to determine them.
And no sly rules to circumvent the diktats of the Court and protect one's automotive industry: national legislation cannot make it impossible or excessively difficult to obtain adequate compensation for the damage caused to the buyer.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/smartcity/dieselgate-perche-la-sentenza-della-corte-di-giustizia-ue-e-fumo-negli-occhi-per-mercedes/ on Tue, 21 Mar 2023 11:45:13 +0000.