Get 40% Off
⚠ Earnings Alert! Which stocks are poised to surge?
See the stocks on our ProPicks radar. These strategies gained 19.7% year-to-date.
Unlock full list

EU court adviser finds against Dyson in vacuum cleaner dispute

Published 22/02/2018, 12:57
Updated 22/02/2018, 13:00
© Reuters.  EU court adviser finds against Dyson in vacuum cleaner dispute

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - A top European court advisor has rejected a complaint by British vacuum cleaner firm Dyson that EU energy labels underplay the efficiency of its bagless devices, in an initial opinion that could sway a court ruling next month.

Dyson, whose devices were the brainchild of billionaire British inventor James Dyson, says ordinary cleaners become less energy efficient as their bags become clogged with dust, unlike Dyson's bagless cleaner.

It says the EU's energy efficiency labels fail to recognise this. In a separate case, Dyson, whose founder was among campaigners for Britain to leave the European Union, has challenged the labelling system itself.

Dyson took legal action against BSH, which sells home appliances under the brands Siemens and Bosch, saying that it was misleading consumers by failing to mention that the tests were carried out with an empty dust bag.

A Belgian court referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ), the highest EU court.

Advocate general Henrik Saugmandsgaard Oe was giving an initial opinion on Thursday as part of that process.

Oe said EU law made the energy label compulsory and also set out its format and the information to be included in it. The methodology of the test was not part of that information.

He concluded that EU law precluded the use of supplementary labels on energy efficiency as these would undermine the aim of the law -- to standardise information for consumers.

The ECJ will rule on the matter in the coming months. Judges typically follow the line of the advocate general but are not bound to do so.

Dyson lost the initial case at the General Court, the second-highest EU court, but the ECJ upheld an appeal in 2015 and ordered a review. The lower court, it said, had failed to establish that a test on cleaners with full bags could not be easily reproduced.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.