Case C-100/21, Mercedes-Benz Group (Liability of manufacturers of vehicles fitted with defeat devices): Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg — Germany) — QB v Mercedes-Benz Group AG, formerly Daimler AG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Approval of motor vehicles — Directive 2007/46/EC — Article 18(1) — Article 26(1) — Article 46 — Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 — Article 5(2) — Motor vehicles — Diesel engine — Pollutant emissions — Exhaust gas recirculation valve (EGR valve) — Reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions limited by a ‘temperature window’ — Defeat device — Protection of the interests of an individual purchaser of a vehicle equipped with an unlawful defeat device — Right to compensation from the vehicle manufacturer on the basis of tortious liability — Method of calculating compensation — Principle of effectiveness — Article 267 TFEU — Admissibility — Reference to the Court from a single judge)
Date: 2023-03-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EC conformity marking, approval, atmospheric pollutant, damages, diesel engine, motor vehicle industry, motor vehicle pollution, producer's liability, reduction of gas emissions, vehicle parts








C_2023164EN.01000401.xml










8.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/4






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg — Germany) — QB v Mercedes-Benz Group AG, formerly Daimler AG
(Case C-100/21, (1) Mercedes-Benz Group (Liability of manufacturers of vehicles fitted with defeat devices))
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Approval of motor vehicles - Directive 2007/46/EC - Article 18(1) - Article 26(1) - Article 46 - Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 - Article 5(2) - Motor vehicles - Diesel engine - Pollutant emissions - Exhaust gas recirculation valve (EGR valve) - Reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions limited by a ‘temperature window’ - Defeat device - Protection of the interests of an individual purchaser of a vehicle equipped with an unlawful defeat device - Right to compensation from the vehicle manufacturer on the basis of tortious liability - Method of calculating compensation - Principle of effectiveness - Article 267 TFEU - Admissibility - Reference to the Court from a single judge)
(2023/C 164/04)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Ravensburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: QB

Defendant: Mercedes-Benz Group AG, formerly Daimler AG

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 18(1), Article 26(1) and Article 46 of Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles (Framework Directive), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 385/2009 of 7 May 2009, read in conjunction with Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007 on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information,
must be interpreted as protecting, in addition to public interests, the specific interests of the individual purchaser of a motor vehicle vis-à-vis the manufacturer of that vehicle where that vehicle is equipped with a prohibited defeat device, within the meaning of the latter provision.










2.


EU law must be interpreted as meaning that, in the absence of provisions of EU law governing the matter, it is for the law of the Member State concerned to determine the rules concerning compensation for damage actually caused to the purchaser of a vehicle equipped with a prohibited defeat device, within the meaning of Article 5(2) of Regulation No 715/2007, provided that that compensation is adequate with respect to the damage suffered.






(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.