- Vehicle Emissions Contrary to EU Law and in Breach of Contract (Advocate General’s Opinion in Cases C-128/20 GSMB Invest, C-134/20 Volkswagen and C-145/20 Porsche Inter Auto and Volkswagen Cases C‑128/20, C‑134/20 and C‑145/20)
- What are the practical implications of these cases?
- What was the background?
- What did the AG opine?
- Case details
EU Law analysis: The Advocate General’s Opinion in these three references to the Court of Justice for preliminary rulings arise out of the practices of some vehicle manufacturers to equip a vehicle’s engine with a device, known as a defeat device, which distorts the results of tests for emissions of polluting gases. The devices in these cases were sophisticated, in that they suppressed the reduction of certain emissions by reference to the outside temperature and altitude at which the vehicle was operated. The Advocate General (AG) concluded that the devices were prohibited defeat devices contrary to applicable EU law. Further, he concluded that the purchaser of a vehicle with a prohibited defeat device had a right under EU law to cancel the contract of sale because the lack of conformity with relevant vehicle standards was not a minor irregularity. Written by Denis Edwards, barrister at Normanton Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial