Claimants’ Opening: “The Law Supports Our Case At Every Turn”
The long-awaited Dieselgate trial opened in London with a confident salvo from the claimants. Lead barrister Tom de la Mare KC declared that “the law supports our case at every turn,” setting an unambiguous tone for what is already shaping up to be one of the UK’s most complex consumer and environmental battles in recent years.
De la Mare argued that this is not a case of technical confusion or regulatory grey areas, but one of intentional misconduct. The claimants say major manufacturers installed unlawful “defeat devices” — software that detects when a car is being tested for emissions and temporarily reduces pollution output to pass the test. On real roads, however, emissions allegedly soared far above legal limits.
Representing hundreds of thousands of diesel-car owners, firms such as Pogust Goodhead and Leigh Day outlined the structure of the case. The High Court will examine twenty sample vehicles built between 2012 and 2017 to determine whether those models contained prohibited devices. If they did, the claimants will argue this amounts to both a breach of contract and a statutory violation — opening the door to compensation.
De la Mare’s message was deliberately uncompromising: this case, he said, is not about obscure technical arguments, but about a choice by powerful corporations to mislead the public. In his words, “the law supports our case at every turn.”
Defendants’ Opening: “This Is Not Another VW Scandal”
The manufacturers struck back quickly. Their message was equally clear — this is not another Volkswagen scandal. They warned the court against drawing easy parallels to the 2015 emissions crisis that rocked the global automotive industry.
According to the defence, the claimants have oversimplified both the engineering and the law. Emissions systems, they argued, are extraordinarily complex, designed to balance performance, fuel efficiency and environmental standards. What the claimants call “defeat devices,” the manufacturers say are legitimate temperature- and condition-based controls, fully compliant with regulations in place at the time.
The defence teams also pushed back against the narrative of corporate deceit. They insisted that each company involved must be judged on its own facts, not by association with the earlier Volkswagen case. To accept the claimants’ sweeping arguments, they warned, would be to turn legitimate engineering into alleged criminality overnight.
Throughout the first week, the defence counsel raised sharp procedural questions: Were the sample vehicles fairly chosen? Are the expert methods sound? Does the legal definition of a “defeat device” even apply here? Their strategy was to inject doubt at every turn — to make clear that, if the claimants want to win, they will have to prove every single technical and legal link in the chain.
The carmakers’ opening statements set a firm tone of defiance. While the claimants seek to frame the trial as a morality play about deception and accountability, the defence wants it seen as a battle over science, precision and the limits of regulation.
What the First Week Reveals — and What Comes Next
After one week, the lines are drawn. The claimants are portraying Dieselgate as an open-and-shut story of corporate misconduct, with the law firmly on their side. The defendants are fighting back by complicating that story — arguing that this is not about wrongdoing, but about misinterpretation and technical nuance.
The High Court will soon face difficult questions: What exactly counts as a “defeat device”? Were these manufacturers acting in bad faith, or just working within the boundaries of a shifting regulatory landscape? And how can justice be balanced for the hundreds of thousands of ordinary drivers now caught up in the fallout?
The early exchanges have already brought a sense of theatre to the courtroom — one side invoking moral outrage, the other warning of overreach. Both know the stakes are huge, not only for the claimants, but for the future of consumer-environmental law in the UK.
As evidence begins to unfold in the coming weeks, all eyes will remain on the High Court to see whether this case confirms the claimants’ rallying cry — that “the law supports our case at every turn” — or whether the defence’s warning will prove prescient: that this is not another Volkswagen scandal.
And for those still wondering if they can take part, there is good news — drivers can still join the ongoing Dieselgate claims. Check below for more information and tap the Join the Claim button to see if you qualify.
Appendix: Sources
- The Law Supports Our Case at Every Turn, Law Gazette
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/the-law-supports-our-case-at-every-turn-high-court-hears-as-dieselgate-case-opens/5124739.article - Pogust Goodhead to Continue as Co-Leader in Dieselgate Trial, Law Gazette
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/pogust-goodhead-to-continue-as-co-leader-in-dieselgate-trial/5124752.article - This Is Not Another VW Scandal, Court Hears as Car Giants Make Dieselgate Openings, Law Gazette
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/this-is-not-another-vw-scandal-court-hears-as-car-giants-make-dieselgate-openings/5124798.article
