Breaking: Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise
 

Filed under: Government/Legal, GM, Saab, Earnings/Financials, Spyker


"Smack." That's the sound of Spyker's process server dropping a big ol' pile of legal documents on the doorstep of The Renaissance Center, home of General Motors - or wherever GM's attorneys live during business hours. Contained therein is a Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and demanding a jury trial, that seeks $3 billion in damages due to "the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market." Spyker accuses GM of "tortiously interfering" with Saab's business relationship with Chinese automaker Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile (Youngman), actions that Spyker CEO Victor Muller (above) said "deliberately drove Saab Automobile into bankruptcy."

(From Wikipedia: "Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships.")

The interference in question specifically refers to the very last potential deal, called the Framework Agreement, that Spyker worked out with Youngman. With lots of GM engineering embedded into the 9-4X and 9-5, The General had the right to approve any Saab partnership that would involve the transfer of GM intellectual property. Spyker had been rebuffed over every previous deal with a Chinese firm, including two bids by Youngman, due to GM concerns over its IP getting into Chinese hands and having to face Chinese-market competitors using its technology. The Complaint alleges that the Framework Agreement would have put a firewall around all GM IP - Youngman would only work on Saab's Phoenix platform, said to be just about free of GM tech, and would have no access to 9-3, 9-4X or 9-5 technology until after Saab ceased all ties to GM.

Thoretically, as stated in the Complant, this should have spared Saab the need to even ask GM for permission to make the deal outlined in the Framework Agreement since it didn't involve any transfer of GM technology. GM felt differently and repeatedly, publicly proclaimed that the Framework Agreement couldn't proceed without GM's say-so, which GM would not give, and that led to Youngman walking away. It is those public proclamations by GM that Spyker alleges as tortious interference. That's the basics, but there's a lot more to be discovered in the 27-page Complaint, which can be found here.

Muller said they've been working on preparing the lawsuit since bankruptcy was declared last year, and with a view to a lengthy and heinously expensive court battle, Muller's golden touch with securing money has come through yet again: a third party has furnished Spyker with the "backing required to see the lawsuit through to the end." There's a press release below announcing the move, otherwise known as "the first shot."Continue reading Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise
Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise originally appeared on Autoblog on Mon, 06 Aug 2012 10:27:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.


Permalink | Email this | Comments

More...

Ouch.

I hope they win.

Why?

GM had a right to protect there IP, And china isnt know as a place the always respects someone else IP so I can understand how GM might not of liked the Idea.

Anyway saab was a sinking ship a long time before this, this one deal would not of saved the company in the least.

That's like saying why bother arresting gang bangers when they disrespect the law or innocent civilians. Just because it's difficult doesnt mean nothing should be done about it.

Plus, I despise GM.

I hate GM even more now. Not only are they whinny little princess bitches, now they've used law to protect something I'm not even remotely sure is a legitimate idea in the first place. IP.

This is an example of an entrenched and protected capital interest using the state/law to shield itself from competition. It is the OPPOSITE of free market.

Good for Spyker.

They agreed to GM's terms and then come back later and bitch about it then they can't make them work. Its not fair to blame GM for Spyker problems with SAAB.

If Spyker thought that they could of made a deal with Youngman, why didn't they? Why did Youngman back out? Youngman thought that the deal would be more of a pain in the ass then it was worth. GM didnt hold a gun to Spyker head when they took control of SAAB, they agreed to ask GM if they where going to share platform info with other people.

Spyker is crying because they failed and what to go back on the deal.



I like Spyker's cars.