Luxury car makers BMW and Mercedes-Benz are facing separate $100 million class actions over the alleged use of cheat devices on emissions tests.
Toyota Australia has been hit with a class action on behalf of up to half a million owners of diesel-powered vehicles which allegedly contain diesel ‘defeat devices’ that allowed the car manufacturer to cheat on emissions tests.
Japanese truck maker Hino has been hit with a class action alleging the Toyota unit misrepresented that it vehicles met Australian emissions and road standards over a 20 year period, after the car company admitted to cheating on emissions and fuel economy tests in Japan.
The sacked CEO of Orix Australia has abandoned his challenge to a ruling allowing a set-off defence for the fleet management company in his case for unpaid leave entitlements and penalties.
Mercedes-Benz has been hit with $12.5 million in penalties for failing to use attention capturing, high impact language when communicating with customers about a compulsory recall of potentially deadly Takata airbags.
UK automotive distributor Inchcape has challenged a judgment that put insurer Chubb on the hook for some but not all of the financial losses stemming from a cyberattack that allegedly caused $4 million in loss.
Mercedes-Benz will face a penalty in ACCC proceedings alleging the luxury car maker exposed consumers to serious injury or death by failing to comply with obligations under a compulsory recall of potentially deadly Takata airbags.
South Korean car makers Hyundai and Kia are facing a class action investigation in Australia over cars containing potentially defective petrol engines, after agreeing to a settlement worth more than $1 billion in related US litigation last year.
Despite noting that a class action trial and appeal were “unusual”, a judge overseeing a long-running class action against Ford has refused an application to send a notice to group members about a coming appeal in the case.
The sacked boss of fleet management Orix Australia, who is seeking $1 million in unpaid leave, wants to challenge a decision allowing the company’s defence that anything it owes is set off by the losses the former CEO allegedly caused.