Dutch court orders JLR to destroy BYD files seized in August raid

Key facts

• The District Court of The Hague ordered JLR to destroy the seized documents within 24 hours of the ruling.
• JLR faces a 50,000 euro ($55,000) penalty per hour of delay, capped at 500,000 euros ($553,000).
• JLR must give BYD third-party confirmation of destruction within 24 hours, per the ruling.
• The court found JLR did not need the material, noting the Ti 7 has not been sold in the European Union.
• JLR has begun summary proceedings over the alleged infringement in Rotterdam and The Hague.
• JLR claims the Ti 7 is a slavish imitation of the Land Rover Defender, which BYD denies.

A Dutch court ruled in favor of BYD in its intellectual property dispute with Jaguar Land Rover, ordering the British carmaker to destroy documents seized from BYD's Netherlands offices, according to a ruling published by the District Court of The Hague on Thursday.

Judge H.F.R. van Heemstra gave JLR 24 hours from formal notice to comply. If it fails, the company faces a penalty of 50,000 euros ($55,000) per hour, capped at 500,000 euros ($553,000). Within 24 hours of destroying the material, JLR must also provide BYD with third-party confirmation that it has been destroyed, Electrek reported. The court rejected JLR's request to pay a 500,000 euro fine.

The files were seized in August from BYD's offices in Schiedam and Hoofddorp under a court order sought by JLR, NDTV reported. The haul reportedly included Ti 7 launch plans, technical data and financial records. The court found JLR did not need the material to show the Ti 7 copied the Defender's exterior design or to calculate damages, since BYD has not sold the Ti 7 in the European Union.

JLR claims the Ti 7 is a slavish imitation of the Land Rover Defender and that BYD stripped down the Defender to reverse-engineer some of its technology. BYD's lawyers called the raid a fishing expedition and said too many files were seized. JLR has already begun summary proceedings over the infringement in Rotterdam and The Hague, and the court barred further action under the initial seizure order.