BYD wins first court battle against Land Rover as British carmaker is ordered to destroy seized documents
Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) has suffered a legal setback in the Netherlands in a dispute in which it accuses Chinese carmaker BYD of copying the Land Rover Defender. A court in The Hague ordered the British company to destroy or return documents seized from BYD’s offices and pay more than €25,000 in legal costs. The ruling does not, however, clear BYD of the copying allegations. The main dispute over the Defender’s design rights continues.
Court orders seized documents to be destroyed
According to a report by Dutch news agency ANP on 11 November, a court in The Hague found that JLR had insufficient grounds for the extensive seizure of BYD’s internal documents.
The dispute began in August, when bailiffs acting at JLR’s request collected digital documents from BYD’s offices in Schiedam and Hoofddorp. The British carmaker sought to secure evidence of a possible intellectual property infringement.
JLR suspects that BYD used Land Rover Defender design features and possibly reverse engineering when developing the Ti7 SUV.
BYD challenged the seizure of the documents, describing it as an unjustifiably broad collection of internal company information.
The court agreed with the Chinese manufacturer’s objections. In the judge’s view, JLR can assess the alleged copying of the design without BYD’s confidential documents. The data in question is also unnecessary for determining the extent of any potential damages, as BYD has not yet sold the Ti7 in the European Union.
Land Rover faces a penalty of €50,000 per hour
Under the ruling, JLR must return or destroy the seized material within 24 hours.
Failure to comply could result in a penalty payment of €50,000 for every hour of delay.
JLR must also pay BYD €25,376.57 in legal costs.
The court also rejected JLR’s request to impose a €500,000 penalty on BYD for its alleged refusal to cooperate.
Question of Defender copying remains unresolved
The significance of the ruling should not be overstated.
The court in The Hague did not decide whether the BYD Ti7 infringes the Defender’s design rights or copyright. The ruling concerned only the lawfulness of the evidence-gathering process.
JLR continues to pursue its claims in courts in The Hague and Rotterdam.
The British manufacturer must now establish which specific protected design elements BYD allegedly copied.
This is no easy task. A boxy body, an upright front end and pronounced wheel arches are conventional design features of many SUVs. The legally decisive issue will be the possible use of specific protected designs, rather than the cars’ overall resemblance.
JLR does, however, have previous experience. In 2019, the company won a court case in China against the manufacturer of the Landwind X7, whose car copied protected design elements of the Range Rover Evoque.
BYD challenges the Defender primarily on price
The commercial background to the court case is at least as interesting as the legal issues.
BYD is preparing to launch Ti7 sales in the UK in January 2027. The seven-seat plug-in hybrid SUV has a starting price of £47,995, or approximately €55,000. By comparison, the seven-seat Land Rover Defender 110 starts at £68,465 in the UK, or approximately €79,000. The price difference is therefore around €24,000.
The Ti7 offers a plug-in hybrid powertrain, generous equipment and a spacious cabin. The Defender’s strengths, by contrast, remain its established reputation, proven off-road capability and European service network.
For JLR, the threat is clear. BYD could attract buyers who want an SUV with the Defender’s size and looks but are unwilling to pay as much for it.
First court victory does not end the competitive battle
BYD secured a procedural victory that limits JLR’s ability to use the Chinese company’s confidential documents to gather evidence.
This gives BYD an advantage in the ongoing dispute, but does not rule out the possibility that a court will later find an infringement of a protected design.
The case is significant for the European automotive industry. Chinese manufacturers are no longer competing solely with inexpensive electric cars, but are also moving increasingly forcefully into the market for more expensive SUVs.
JLR’s underlying problem will not disappear even if the company wins the design dispute. BYD and other Chinese manufacturers can offer increasingly large, powerful and well-equipped cars at substantially lower prices.
A court ruling can protect intellectual property, but it is no substitute for a competitive product.
