0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

The volt-head has overtaken the petrol-head - provided the batteries don’t run out…..

31 March 2011

Tesla has issued proceedings against the BBC for malicious falsehood and defamation following Top Gear’s review of Tesla’s Roadster car.

The defamation claim relates to a statement that the electric car would only last 55 miles on a test track, despite the manufacturer claim of 200 miles. Tesla says the statement suggests it had “grossly misled potential purchasers” but surely most drivers know that a car’s range is reduced if driven hard, especially around a race track.

The malicious falsehood claim appears stronger. The claim states the Roadster never actually ran out of charge, despite footage showing it being pushed into a garage. Whether the footage amounts to malicious falsehood may depend on whether such footage is widely understood to be dramatised for entertainment purposes, or whether it should be taken to be a serious review of the car’s performance.

Tesla are evidently upset but litigating will only draw attention to other features of the Top Gear review, potentially exposing their cars to further negative coverage.

Related opinions

Flexible working, childcare and indirect sex discrimination – important reminder

The courts have long recognised that, on a societal level, women bear a greater burden of childcare responsibilities than men which can make it more difficult for women to comply with employer requirements for flexible working (known as the ‘childcare disparity’).

View blog

Relief for landlords as the Court of Appeal confirms that leases have been validly contracted out

One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.

View blog

The High Court offers no comfort for beleaguered retailers

Whilst this decision may not be surprising, it will undoubtedly send a chill down the spine of retailers in a similar position to The Fragrance Shop.

View blog

Developers: disregard restrictive covenants at your peril

The Supreme Court has decided a significant appeal on the Upper Tribunal’s power to discharge or modify restrictive covenants pursuant to section 84(1) of the Law of Property Act (“1925 Act”).

View blog

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up