Does electric car not reach the stated range? Possible ground to terminate the sale!

The range is an important consideration for many when buying an electric car. If the range is mentioned when selling an electric car, it is important (depending on the wording) that the car actually achieves this range. The Supreme Court ruled on 28 June 2024 (ECLI:NL:HR:2024:980) in a case where a buyer of an electric Jaguar had rescinded the purchase agreement because the car did not always achieve the stated range.

Background

In 2018, Jaguar launched an electric car, the Jaguar I-PACE. Jaguar’s sales brochure mentioned that the I-PACE has a range of 480 kilometres. A Dutch car dealer selling this model copied this range in its own I-PACE advertisement on its website. However, a buyer who bought the I-PACE from the dealer complained shortly after the purchase that the I-PACE only had a range of about 300 kilometres. Incidentally, this was a problem experienced by several consumers and buyers of the I-PACE. The cause seemed to be the conditions of the winter season.

The buyer gave the car dealer the opportunity to modify the car in such a way that the range of 480 kilometres was still achieved, but repair was not forthcoming. The buyer subsequently terminated the purchase agreement.

Legal process

The proceedings between the buyer and the car dealer centred on whether the buyer was allowed to terminate the purchase agreement. The court of appeal ruled that this was allowed. To this end, the court considered in summary as follows.

• Based on the statements made by car dealer about the range of the Jaguar I-PACE, the buyer could reasonably expect the car to have a significantly higher range than around 300 kilometres under usual conditions.
• This means that the purchase agreement entails that the car dealer had to supply a car with that feature.
• The actual range achieved of at most around 300 kilometres in winter is over 35% less than the 480-kilometre range advertised by the car dealer.
• For this reason, the car delivered by the car dealer to the buyer does not comply with the purchase agreement concluded between them.

The seller appeals in cassation. The Supreme Court rules that the court of appeal correctly applied the testing framework for non-conformity: An item does not comply with the contract if the item, also taking into account the nature of the item and the statements made by the seller about the item, does not possess the features that the buyer was entitled to expect under the contract. The court of appeal’s judgment stands.

Relevance ruling

The Supreme Court ruling highlights the importance of accurate communications about an item to be sold. Those communications have an impact on whether or not an item complies with the contract ((non-)conformity). In the present case, non-conformity justified termination of the purchase agreement. In view of the enormous increase in the number of electric cars that have been and are being sold, manufacturers and sellers would seem well advised to further specify the action radius, as far as necessary, or state more clearly what it depends on and what the consequences of certain (weather) conditions are. After all, a lower range than stated could have far-reaching consequences for the enforceability of the sales contract.

In conclusion

Do you have any questions following the above? Feel free to contact us, we will be happy to think with you.

Questions?