2001 Saab 9-3 Viggen Hatchback 4-door 2.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Spyker files $3 billion lawsuit against General Motors over Saab's demise

"Smack." That's the sound of Spyker's process server dropping a big ol' pile of legal documents on the doorstep of The Renaissance Center, home of General Motors - or wherever GM's attorneys live during business hours. Contained therein is a Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and demanding a jury trial, that seeks $3 billion in damages due to "the unlawful actions GM took to avoid competition with Saab Automobile in the Chinese market." Spyker accuses GM of "tortiously interfering" with Saab's business relationship with Chinese automaker Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile (Youngman), actions that Spyker CEO Victor Muller (above) said "deliberately drove Saab Automobile into bankruptcy."
(From Wikipedia: "Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships.")
The interference in question specifically refers to the very last potential deal, called the Framework Agreement, that Spyker worked out with Youngman. With lots of GM engineering embedded into the 9-4X and 9-5, The General had the right to approve any Saab partnership that would involve the transfer of GM intellectual property. Spyker had been rebuffed over every previous deal with a Chinese firm, including two bids by Youngman, due to GM concerns over its IP getting into Chinese hands and having to face Chinese-market competitors using its technology. The Complaint alleges that the Framework Agreement would have put a firewall around all GM IP - Youngman would only work on Saab's Phoenix platform, said to be just about free of GM tech, and would have no access to 9-3, 9-4X or 9-5 technology until after Saab ceased all ties to GM.

GM wins appeal, dismissal of $3B Saab-related Spyker suit

It's been a long time since we last heard of the legal battles between Spyker CEO Victor Muller and General Motors, the automaker from which Muller's company purchased the embattled Saab brand back in 2010. To refresh your memories, after struggling through 2011 and entering into bankruptcy, Spyker attempted to save the Saab brand by selling it to a Chinese consortium. General Motors, though, blocked the sale because it did not want any of its intellectual property, of which Saab was in possession of from its days under the GM umbrella, in the hands of a potential rival automaker. Spyker then sued GM for intentionally blocking what it said was Saab's only chance of survival. The $3-billion suit was dismissed after a judge ruled in favor of GM, which apparently had granted a license to Saab to continue building cars using its technologies, but reserved the right to cancel that agreement if Saab again changed hands. Spyker appealed, and, according to Reuters, the appeals court upheld the previous ruling, again siding with GM. National Electric Vehicle Sweden, the company that eventually purchased Saab out of bankruptcy, managed to restart production for a short period before itself falling into financial trouble. We have at least another month to wait before hearing how Saab's next chapter may read.

Court extends Saab reorganization bid until end of November

Saab parent company National Electric Vehicle Sweden refuses to go down without a fight. After a recent trip to court, the company is emerging with an extension on its reorganization until November 29. According to Europe Online Magazine, there's also an appointed committee of creditors and union representatives to monitor NEVS' restructuring process.
NEVS still isn't giving up hope of saving itself, and the company claims there are has two potential strategies for getting back on its feet. The main plan is to "finalize the negotiations with the two Asian automotive manufacturers," according to a press release. Those firms still aren't identified, but Mahindra may be involved. According to Europe Online Magazine, one of the businesses is looking to take partial ownership of NEVS, and the other is considering some sort of cooperation with it.
If that plan fails, the second option is to take advantage of the factory and become a contract manufacturer.