US legal case

[boatwrong05]

Can any lawyers on here help us understand what's going on with the US Ineos / JLR case? 

 

[emax]

Is there still a case?
Links on the web?
Informations?

 

[DenisM]

I can't find any reference to the US case, but a quick search showed JLR appear to have brought a case also in the Italian courts which Ineos successfully defended... (it's in Italian so thanks to Google Translate!?)  the tactic appears to be that JLR are attempting to block Ineos in specific markets having been rebuffed in the UK. JLR obviously see the Ineos as a threat ?.
Go! Sir Jim ???!

There's a concise summary of JLR's arguments to the UK High Court  and why they were comprehensively rejected on a website called "The Trademark Factory" ...
https://dev.trademarkfactory.com/land-rover-vs-ineos-grenadier

 

[boatwrong05]

Looks like there's an active case in NJ district...last update was January

I'm too cheap to pay for the filings but here's at least the original PDF'd along with some copy that says it's why US is delayed until 2023

 

[4/3rds]

Possibly one of the reasons that the US market is last to get these?

 

[Spjnr]

So infuriating that Land rover are still pursuing this... 

JLR didn't see the future of the Defender as a rugged utility vehicle on a ladder frame chassis with solid axles, they saw it as a luxury air sprung barge for the suburban family.

Why can't they stand by their decision and let the Grenadier go on and sell on its merits...? 

If they think solid axles, coil springs and ladder chassis are old, useless tech, then why would they be worried? 

(probably has something to do with the hundreds of thousands of Wranglers that are sold yearly....)

 

[stickshifter]

[QUOTE username=Spjnr userid=8443805 postid=1332843170]So infuriating that Land rover are still pursuing this... 

JLR didn't see the future of the Defender as a rugged utility vehicle on a ladder frame chassis with solid axles, they saw it as a luxury air sprung barge for the suburban family.

Why can't they stand by their decision and let the Grenadier go on and sell on its merits...? 

If they think solid axles, coil springs and ladder chassis are old, useless tech, then why would they be worried? 

(probably has something to do with the hundreds of thousands of Wranglers that are sold yearly....)[/QUOTE]

Well said. JLR vacated the ‘Wrangler space’ (solid front axle, diff locks, body on frame). They need to accept their choice, or get back into the market and compete. Whining / suing is pretty weak.

 

[Spjnr]

[QUOTE username=stickshifter userid=8617054 postid=1332843234]

Well said. JLR vacated the ‘Wrangler space’ (solid front axle, diff locks, body on frame). They need to accept their choice, or get back into the market and compete. Whining / suing is pretty weak.[/QUOTE]

Reminds me of a child that suddenly wants the toy you just took off him, even though he hadn't touched it for days ?

 

[3DDiY]

JLR gets a year of selling their defender without a new player that is selling a utility vehicle. They are seeing the numbers and the interest and I'm sure they are concerned. Its cheaper to hire lawyers then to lose out on those sales I'm sure. But regardless of that all of this was their doing. The funny thing is JLR doesn't even have the inventory for the demand they have for their defender. They keep selling out. So why even worry about Ineos. Just move on and keep dealing with your luxury market. Work on getting chips to get more cars out. Cause the people who want the Grenadier aren't the people who want that new Defender. 

 

[emax]

They are just pissed. 

Bad losers.

 

[boatwrong05]

Ok. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, etc...

I spent a few bucks to read the court filings. It looks like Ineos brought the case, basically shopping for a jurisdiction while they were / are litigating with JLR internationally. JLR responded their US entity was not the same as their other (European) entity which has sued Ineos before, therefore Ineos couldn't bring a case in America. The judge agreed, and it looks like the case basically died after that. 

I think - again, not a lawyer - this isn't to say JLR can't sue in America later, like right before the Grenadier goes on sale here. But I don't think this case is a blocker per se to us getting access.

Someone please correct me if I am misspeaking here. 

 

[aylestage]

I think all of the effort being made by JLR in courts demonstrates that Land Rover as a business have got it wrong. Too many high end vehicles with no hardy option. I am sure they have realised that the Grenadier is going to have a huge impact on Land Rover as a business especially in vehicle sales; all over the world. It’s probably not unreasonable to conclude that the Grenadier is likely to push them out of the market place where customers require a hardy 4x4 on a ladder chassis. Interesting especially as they have shunned this market area and gone down the SUV route. 

 

[Shaky]

JLR have seen this coming long before any of us, most likely starting when Ratcliffe asked to buy the tooling machines etc.  They could have brought out a pared down version of the defender with four seats and no air bags or even beat Ineos to the punch and brought out a pick up.  They could have competed with what they already have or what was possibly planned but they haven’t bothered. As others have said they are to interested in building luxury vehicles, so they shouldn’t moan about others filling a gap in the market. 
The UK is completely starved of good 4x4 vehicles, with several of the double cab pickup manufacturers pulling out of the UK. That is on top of several models not being available in the UK. It’s a shame but at long last we are getting the IG and it should do well. 

 

[aylestage]

Yeh I agree shaky I think it will do extremely well 

 

[GrouseK9]

I suspect JLR is losing more sales because of their F'd up production problems, than another vehicle entering the market. The quality of the end product will hurt them more as well. I guess they would rather spend their dollars on lawyering up rather than solving their manufacturing problems.