display
Karlsruhe (dpa) - Almost five and a half years after the VW emissions scandal broke up, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) is dealing with the role of the Audi subsidiary.
The highest civil judge in Karlsruhe will negotiate a model case from Saxony-Anhalt on Monday (1 p.m.), in which the diesel buyer sued not the VW group, but Audi directly for damages.
The judgment should not be announced on the same day, but promptly.
(Az. VI ZR 505/19)
It has been clear since May 2020 that Volkswagen has systematically deceived millions of car buyers with the secret use of a manipulated exhaust technology and is fundamentally liable for it.
At that time, the highest civil judge of the BGH decided in their first and most important judgment on the diesel scandal that plaintiffs could return their car to VW.
However, you do not get the full purchase price back, you have to count the kilometers you have driven.
The question is whether Audi is also to be blamed for immoral damage.
The scandal engine EA189 was developed at VW.
The higher regional court in Naumburg had recently awarded the plaintiff around 20,000 euros in damages plus interest.
The judges said that the Ingolstadt carmaker was just as liable because he had used the prohibited technology in his vehicles and brought them into circulation.
display
According to Audi, there are a low four-digit number of such procedures.
However, this also includes cases in which a lawsuit was filed so late that the claims may have expired.
Other plaintiffs only bought their Audi after the emissions scandal broke out in September 2015.
According to the BGH, this group has no right to compensation - the issue has been so present since then that no one can say that VW has duped them.
Such plaintiffs are now increasingly trying to take action against VW because of the software update that had to remove the inadmissible defeat device.
She had ensured that the diesel cars emitted significantly less toxic nitrogen oxides in tests than in road traffic.
Diesel lawyers are now accusing Volkswagen of the fact that the technology installed causes pollutant emissions to fluctuate depending on the outside temperature.
That is also inadmissible.
VW considers the lawsuits to be futile and claims that the technology has been tested and approved by the authorities.
The BGH actually wanted to negotiate this issue on Monday.
The appointment had to be canceled at short notice because the plaintiff had withdrawn his revision.
(Az. VI ZR 513/20)
display
© dpa-infocom, dpa: 210222-99-537746 / 2
Announcement of the Audi case
Cancellation of the VW case
display
Principle judgment of May 25th
BGH notification on this
BGH judgment of July 30th on interest and frequent travelers
BGH judgment of July 30th on VW's compensation
BGH judgment of July 30th on tort interest
BGH judgment of July 30th on the purchase from autumn 2015
BGH judgment of December 8th on corporate brands
display
BGH judgment of December 17th on the statute of limitations
BGH decision of January 19 on the Daimler thermal window