Commenting on the ruling, a Dyson Spokesperson said,

In 2017 the European Court of Justice, Europe’s highest court, set out in clear terms that the Commission cannot validly test a vacuum cleaner when empty of dust and that, in unlawfully stipulating an empty test, the Commission had broken its own laws and ignored Dyson’s evidence. Now, ruling on Dyson’s damages claim, the lower-tier General Court, despite accepting the European Court of Justice’s ruling, seems to want to rewrite history. It is trying to argue that the dust loaded testing of vacuum cleaners is inaccurate. This is simply untrue.  The Court has accepted the Commission’s tortuous and weaselly excuses to avoid accepting liability for its wrongdoing.

The General Court has chosen to turn back from the earlier decision of the European Court of Justice and seems unconcerned that the Commission broke their own law and ignored Dyson’s evidence – they declare it is not obvious enough for them to justify damages. This is an insult to the millions of shoppers who were misled and totally ignores the substantial harm – running to £150 million – caused to Dyson. Meanwhile the Commission walks away scot-free despite having favored the European bagged-machine lobby, including the major German manufacturers, throughout.

Dyson will appeal, as we disagree with the Court’s claim that there was doubt about dust-testing. These test methods were adopted decades ago by international standards organisations and applied by testing houses, laboratories, advertising standards bodies and courts across Europe and the world, without question. This judgment sets a very concerning precedent for future regulations across Europe and risks consumers being misled once again.

Bad regulation fails consumers, stifles innovation, hits jobs and slows growth. Dyson technology was significantly disadvantaged by the Energy Label leading to lost sales and significant engineering, research and development costs, not to mention five years of legal challenge to see it overturned. It diverted precious time and resources away from what we should have been doing – inventing and developing new energy efficient products. Is this really the best way to focus technology companies on developing more environmentally friendly products?

The labelling regulation, drawn up by the European Commission, stipulated that vacuum cleaners were tested for grading empty and with no dust.  Unlike some cyclonic machines, vacuum cleaners which rely on bags and filters to separate the dust from the airflow can become clogged with dust as soon as the machine is used, often leading to a loss of suction. As such, consumers would buy a machine which claimed to have an A grade (per EU testing without any dust) but when it was used in the home and filled with dust that performance could drop down to a G grade.

Following Dyson’s five-year legal challenge (2013 – 2018), and appeal through the European Court of Justice, the regulations were found to be unlawful and the label removed from vacuum cleaners. In this most recent case, Dyson was seeking damages of £150m through the European General Court.

Dyson has consistently argued that caps on motor wattage, along with technological advancements that lead to rising levels of energy efficiency, are a far more effective way to spur innovation and reduce environmental impact. Power caps challenge companies to innovate in order to use each joule of energy more efficiently. Such regulations set a clear objective, then allow companies the freedom to work out how to achieve it.