Munich/Erding – How should I come in now?“ Stunned, Christina C. (27) sits on Wednesday in room 4 of the administrative court. Just the judge dismissed their lawsuit. After the exhaust gas scandal at VW and Audi, the Erdingerin must put your Diesel still. “But I am dependent on my car,” says the 27-Year-old.
the lawsuit was heard by a total of six car drivers that refuse to install a controversial Software Update. Five were represented, only Christina C. appeared in person. The admissions office Erding had asked the officer, your Audi A4 Avant to a halt. But Christina C. did not want to. “I work in shifts at the airport and can’t use public transport.” The connection was too bad. To the process, you drove with your car.
also read: Dense fog: woman dies in accident on B301 in Zolling
No Update because of the potential for consequential damages
And why can Christina not just the new Software, so that your Audi is clean? She fears just like the plaintiff, that the Update of the car could have damage and defects. Lawyer Marc Malleis, representing C. and four other plaintiffs, is reported, for example, that one of his clients was since the Update, twelve Times in the workshop.
The court saw it differently – complaints came up. The judgment, under the presiding judge Dr. Dietmar Wolff: “Refuse vehicles to vehicle owners for the retrofit of diesel from the factory equipped with an improper shut-down device, may be refused, the operation of the Car.”
see also: lung specialist for Diesel scandal: nitrogen emissions to the European limit value “totally harmless”
“I think the decision is unfair”
dieselt! Christina C. shakes his head in disbelief: “If you pull before the court, it is hoped, always, to get right, because you can see the legal situation differently.” In its view, the verdict is too hard. “I don’t think the decision is unfair, I see the proportionality.” Has a Chance but the Erdingerin still – if she goes to appeals. Judge Wolff said: “As this is the first case of this kind with a Urteilsspurch, should be given to the possibility that a second instance shall examine the case.”
Whether the plaintiff perceive this possibility is not yet certain. A lawyer has already announced to consider a vocation in account. Also Malleis want to check with C. and the other clients, whether or not he appeals.
Anna Lina Jegg
