Those affected by the diesel scandal now have significantly better chances of enforcing their claims once morest car manufacturers: The European Court of Justice (ECJ) today ruled in a preliminary ruling in favor of a consumer and thus once morest Mercedes-Benz. According to the ECJ, the purpose of the framework directive 2007/46/EG is to protect the interests of a motor vehicle buyer – in particular the interest in not purchasing a vehicle with an illegal defeat device.
This paved the way in Austria for the Supreme Court (OGH) to make clarifying judgments on the liability of manufacturers. On the other hand, all manufacturers who have installed impermissible thermal windows are threatened with a new wave of lawsuits, the Association for Consumer Information announced in a broadcast.
According to the preliminary decision, it is not necessary to maliciously mislead authorities or buyers in order to receive compensation, said Peter Kolba, chairman of the consumer protection association (VSV), according to a broadcast. In the event of negligent damage, claims under Austrian law do not expire following 30 years, as in the case of fraudulent intent, but following three years. On the other hand, negligent damage is easier to prove than fraudulent misrepresentation.
Furthermore, the ECJ has also stated that the compensation determined by the national judge must be appropriate to the damage suffered in application of the principle of effectiveness.
In Austria, numerous proceedings once morest various manufacturers – including 16 class action lawsuits by the VKI once morest VW – are pending, with the Supreme Court waiting for the decision of the ECJ. “The judgment is also the basis for claims for damages once morest all manufacturers who have installed impermissible thermal windows,” said Thomas Himke, head of the legal department at the VKI to the APA.
