In promoting and selling these vehicles, Renault caused massive damage to its customers. The diesel market meanwhile collapsed and the value of the vehicles has greatly diminished. Apart from affecting your wallet, this conduct also had a negative impact on the environment and may have had a negative impact on your health – and on the health of many others. Nevertheless, Renault that presents itself as a “green” and ethical company, continues to deny any wrongdoing.

With its unethical conduct, Renault has engaged in consumer fraud and therefore must be held accountable.

What we are doing

As a large international corporation Renault relies on the fact that a single person does not have the resources to challenge its wrongful conduct. Until recently, collective redress in Europe has been fragmented. This has allowed wrongdoers like Renault to avoid liability to its customers who have suffered financial damage by way of decreased resell values and increased maintenance costs. Now, with the WAMCA-legislation in the Netherlands, the Foundation is able to represent all affected car owners for the corporate wrongdoing of Renault, Dacia and related parties.

Having initiated litigation against four major car conglomerates, the Foundation has obtained significant expertise in proving the presence of defeat devices and determining which vehicles are affected. This leaves the Foundation well placed to serve your interests.

Case info

The case is pending before the Amsterdam District Court and is registered under case number C/13/710434 HA ZA 21-1030. The defendants in the proceedings are Renault S.A, Renault S.A.S., Automobile Dacia S.A., Renault-Nissan B.V., Renault Nederland N.V. and 76 Dutch Renault and Dacia car dealers. A list of all the car dealers involved in the proceedings can be found here.

CURRENT STATUS

On 13 November 2024, the Amsterdam District Court issued an amended information order to Renault. Both parties have been given the opportunity to respond to this order.  The briefs must be submitted to the court on 8 January 2025.

PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RENAULT AND DACIA

• On 25 November 2021, Emissions Justice served a writ of summons on Renault S.A., Renault S.A.S., Automobile Dacia S.A., Renault-Nissan B.V., Renault Nederland N.V., and 76 Dutch Renault and Dacia car dealers. The writ of summons can be found here. Previously, on 25 June 2021, Emissions Justice had requested the Amsterdam district court to extend the period in which Emissions Justice may also initiate a collective action against Renault and Dacia. The Amsterdam district court granted Emissions Justice’s request and extended the time limit by three months. The decision can be found here. Stichting Car Claim, another foundation, also requested an extension which was also granted.
• On 29 December 2021, Renault and Dacia appeared in the proceedings. However, the car dealers, bar one, failed to enter an appearance and were declared to be at default by the court.
• On 23 March 2022, the court adopted the procedural order. The procedural order can be found here. The first phase of the proceedings will deal with jurisdiction of the Amsterdam court, which collective action regime is applicable, and if Emissions Justice and the other foundations are sufficiently representative.
• On 13 July 2022, Renault and Dacia submitted briefs regarding the first phase of the proceedings contesting the jurisdiction of the Amsterdam District Court and applicability of the new collective action regime, the WAMCA.
• On 19 October 2022, the car dealers appeared in the proceedings and also submitted a brief regarding the topics of the first phase of the proceedings.
• A hearing was held on 8 December 2022, in which the parties expressed their views on the jurisdiction of the Amsterdam District Court, the applicability of the WAMCA and whether the constituency of Emissions Justice and the other foundations is sufficiently large for the foundations to be representative. The judgment of 1 February 2023 can be found here. In short, the court ruled that it has jurisdiction, that the constituencies of Emissions Justice and the other foundations are sufficiently large and that the WAMCA does not apply. This means that Emissions Justice can demand a declaratory statement on, inter alia, the legality of the defeat devices, but cannot claim damages in these proceedings.  Such damages claims would need to be litigated in follow-up proceedings.
• Regarding the WAMCA decision, there are currently appeal proceedings pending in the collective actions against Volkswagen et al. and Fiat et al., where a similar decision on WAMCA has been made. If the appellate court overturns the decisions on WAMCA in those proceedings, the Amsterdam district court may apply the WAMCA in these proceedings after all.
• On 26 April 2023, Renault and Dacia filed a reply brief regarding the admissibility of Emissions Justice and applicable law.
• On 29 January 2024, a hearing took place on these matters.
• On 10 April, the Amsterdam district court rendered its decision on the admissibility of the foundations (the decision can be found here). The court judged positively on all aspects of Emissions Justice’s admissibility but ordered Emissions Justice to resubmit one exhibit, which Emissions Justice did. The court also ordered Emissions Claim to amend certain clauses of its litigation funding agreement and submit the amended agreement to the court. The decision is expected on 19 June 2024. Following that, the court will order the defendants to submit their statements of defense.
• On 19 June 2024, the court handed down an interim judgment, available via this link. The court declared Emissions Justice admissible in its claims. In addition, the court ruled that, with the technical evidence they submitted in the proceedings, the plaintiffs have established the suspicion of emissions fraud with sufficient plausibility. The court ordered Renault to inform the court and parties for all its vehicles what manipulation devices it installed in its cars and on what basis it believes those devices are justified. Renault is ordered to submit this information on 18 September 2024. The foundations may then respond to this information and have the opportunity to update their writs of summons. Following that, Renault must submit its statement of defense on the merits of the case.
• On 18 September 2024, Renault issued a brief responding to the information order of the court. Renault only partially complied with the court’s order and raised several objections to the order. Amongst others, Renault invoked secrecy obligations and relied on the commercial sensitivity of the requested information. By judgment of 13 November 2024, (link 7)  the court rejected most of Renault’s objections. Renault must inform the court and the parties for each vehicle and engine type which defeat devices it utilized and why it deems these justified. This applies to the defeat devices that have already been discussed in the proceedings as well as to defeat devices that have not yet been discovered by the parties.  However, the court allowed Renault to substantiate its defenses based on its secrecy obligations and the requested commercial sensitivity. Also, the parties may respond to the amended information order. The briefs need to be submitted to the court by 8 January 2025.