Major car firms found not to have installed emissions-cheating devices

Major car firms found not to have installed emissions-cheating devices Vehicles from a large number of major car manufacturers did not incorporate devices alleged to have allowed them to cheat emissions tests, a justice at the High Court has ruled. More than a dozen manufacturers are being sued by about 1.6 million motorists over claims that diesel vehicles produced from 2009 onward contained “prohibited defeat devices” (PDDs). The litigation focused on 20 “sample vehicles” supplied by five manufacturers: Mercedes‑Benz, Renault, Nissan, Ford, and Peugeot‑Citroën. The 880,000 claimants said they had been misled about the results of emissions testing. After a ten‑week hearing that concluded in March, Lady Justice Cockerill issued a 369‑page ruling today. She stated that most of the strategies examined did not constitute PDDs, noting the sole exception of a feature in Mercedes cars that was withdrawn in 2015 and a separate system used in some Peugeot‑Citroën models. “The Court rejected most of the main allegations brought against the manufacturers whose vehicles were examined at trial,” the judgement read. It added: “In the majority of instances, the Court found that the applicable strategy did not represent a prohibited defeat device.” Mercedes welcomed the outcome but disagreed with the tribunal’s finding that one of its four sample vehicles was non‑compliant prior to a software update. The German automaker said: “In our view, the emission control software functionalities are justifiable on both technical and legal grounds. We are actively considering all of our available options, including a possible appeal.” Peugeot‑Citroën has not yet commented. Claimants either purchased, leased or otherwise obtained a diesel vehicle from one of the companies, with the majority residing in England and Wales. Barristers for the motorists told the court that the devices installed in the cars enabled the vehicles to recognise when they were undergoing a test and to alter the volume of harmful emissions so that the results appeared within regulatory limits. However, the tribunal determined that not every calibration or emissions‑control strategy amounted to a defeat device. “For a defeat instrument to be found, there needs to be an intention to cause the emissions control system to operate differently when it senses it is being tested,” the justice found. “It was not sufficient for the Claimants simply to show that the challenged strategies reduced the effectiveness of emissions‑control systems outside the applicable testing conditions.” Solicitors for the claimants noted that Justice Cockerill remarked, “if an alternate approach to the meaning of ‘defeat device’ were taken, a larger number of devices would be established, including devices in each of the lead manufacturers’ cars.” James Oldnall, managing partner at Milberg, which represented some of the claimants, said: “We are pleased that the tribunal has ruled that Mercedes installed illegal defeat devices, just like Volkswagen.” He added: “The fight is not over on this case, but the first domino has fallen. We are on the right track and will continue pushing to hold these carmakers to account.” A further hearing is scheduled for October this year to determine the consequences of any actionable breaches and to address outstanding issues relating to damages or other remedies. The present action examined only the 20 sample vehicles from Mercedes‑Benz, Renault, Nissan, Ford, and Peugeot‑Citroën. A broader suit also covers models made by Opel and Vauxhall, Volkswagen and Porsche, Jaguar Land Rover, BMW, FCA and Suzuki, Volvo, Hyundai‑Kia, Toyota and Mazda. For background on the dieselgate controversy, see the BBC report: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjr5epw8dweo The dieselgate scandal first surfaced in September 2015, when the US Environmental Protection Agency accused Volkswagen of installing software – later termed “defeat devices” – on diesel cars to lower reported nitrogen‑oxide emissions. That software detected when a vehicle