Tel:+44(0)121 748 4600 Fax:+44(0)121 730 2745 Email: info@iaaf.co.uk Search
The Independent Automotive Aftermarket Federation

Court says VMs are “obliged to disclose VIN” to independent operators

Date: Friday 12 May 2023

In a test case from German automotive trade body GVA against vehicle manufacturer Scania, the Regional Court of Cologne has referred several questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) (Case C-319/22).

One of these questions concerns the refusal of vehicle manufacturers to provide independent operators (parts manufacturers, parts dealers and providers of technical information) with the vehicle identification numbers (VIN) for their vehicles so that they can, for example, allocate their alternative spare parts to individual vehicles. According to many vehicle manufacturers, they can refuse to disclose the VIN on data protection grounds.

The Advocate General at the European Court of Justice took a different view and followed the plaintiff represented by Osborne Clarke. Firstly, he states unequivocally that vehicle manufacturers are obliged to disclose the VIN under Regulation (EU) 2018/858. Secondly, he emphasizes that this obligation is at the same time a legal basis for data processing under Art. 6(1)(c) General Data Protection Regulation, so that the disclosure of the VIN is also permissible under data protection law.

Three questions have been submitted to the ECJ in these proceedings. As the Advocate General was asked by the ECJ to deal only with the question on data protection, the ECJ will likely follow the Advocate General’s legal opinion.

This would also establish that vehicle manufacturers were already obliged in the past to make their VINs available to the players in the markets for service work, spare parts and technical information in order to foster competition there.

This is potentially an important interim success for the independent aftermarket. At the same time, manufacturers would have to fear being confronted with claims for damages due to their refusal in the past.

This is another good example of a trade body raising awareness of VM’s misinterpretations of the legislation for the benefit of the automotive aftermarket and ensuring choice for the motorist.