Spyker vs GM and BMW vs Saab Parts AB. Actually interesting only for lawyers, these are in business and some could make good money, because the amounts in dispute are considerable. We can not completely ignore the topic, because it is also written on other pages, but not always the backgrounds are displayed correctly. Let's summarize the legal events of the sideshops this week.
Spyker vs GM
General Motors is under considerable pressure in the United States. Editorials in various media have already speculated about bankruptcy 2.0 and deny the future viability of the GM model range. Spyker is suing GM for 3 billion in damages from the Saab bankruptcy and Spyker is not alone in the campaign against Detroit.
Until the 28. August GM has time to comment, now the deadline on demand until the 28. September extended. So it does not seem so easy to argue with Spyker's lawsuit.
BMW vs SAAB Parts AB
Not quite as spectacular is the amount in dispute in the second case and none of the opponents would come through the sum in trouble. This week, BMW filed a lawsuit against Saab Parts AB in Nyköping. These are outstanding receivables of 2.6 million €, resulting from engines and component delivery to Saab Automobile AB. Saab developed from September 2010 based on the expiring Mini a new, small Saab and tested BMW engine technology in several model series. The activities with BMW in the engine segment, however, are a chapter in themselves and not the subject of the article.
Actually, this lawsuit would be pointless and not worth a line if it did not have a specific background. Because Saab Parts AB and Saab Automobile AB are legally separated and thus the BMW lawsuit would be doomed to failure. But the BMW lawyers understand their craft and have found a possible, very special loophole.
In the administrative chaos of the Victor Muller era, there were often unconventional agreements. Also with BMW it should have been so. The Saab Automobil Group and BMW met one month after the beginning of the cooperation, in October 2010, against the background of the worsening liquidity crisis, another, additional agreement.
This unusual arrangement on which the lawsuit is based states that "… The most efficient part of the (Saab) group is automatically the invoice recipient ..“In plain language: Whoever has money in the account from the Saab daughters pays. Not the person who ordered and received the goods or services. An agreement to the detriment of healthy daughters, such as Saab Powertrain AB and Saab Parts AB.
With this, Saab wanted to avoid the problem of the already limited liquidity at Automobil AB. Shortly after the agreement was made, according to our sources, the Saab Powertrain AB paid a bill from Munich for parts which had gone to the Automobile AB. The supplier thus sees the agreement in force and consequently makes a claim. As far as our Swedish friends on this topic.
That is the complaint BMW vs Saab Parts AB is singular, because this agreement was unique. The facts are well known in Saab circles and no secret. However, the complaint does not, as in other German-language pages polemically a claim potential for other Saab suppliers against the Saab Parts AB dar.
Whether it is successful at all lies with the judges and the exact wording of the agreement reached should be the decisive factor. It will be exciting for the court in Nyköping only for us when it comes to the whereabouts of the delivered engines. But maybe somebody will tell, maybe in September, this story.
What happens next week ...
The next week Mark and I will continue to write about the Saab topic. But not only. Because we are devoting ourselves intensively to a new car brand and the blog is experiencing a premiere. Another brand on Saabblog.net - shocking? We will see, it will definitely be very exciting!