The claimants, represented by Pogust Goodhead and Leigh Day, argue in their written closing submissions, which run to over 700 pages including a glossary, that the ‘essential facts’ are as pleaded by the claimants.
‘Ultimately, despite various attempts at distraction, the essential facts are as the claimants pleaded. The devices work as [the claimants] have alleged. They do the job they were designed to. And they have the serious adverse effect on NOx emissions for which [the claimants] contend. So this remains a case which in large part will turn on questions of law, as complicated by Brexit.’
The claimants said ‘no…compelling reasons have been advanced’ by the defendants ‘not least because the [defendants’] alternative would be a narrow, technical concept of defeat devices’.
The case, which has been brought on behalf of more than 1.6 million vehicle owners, is one of the largest group actions to be heard in the English and Welsh courts. The claimants, in written submissions, described the case as ‘a fraud trial on engineering facts’.