{"id":2485,"date":"2020-06-08T15:32:13","date_gmt":"2020-06-08T13:32:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rogertulbrich.de\/wp\/?p=2485"},"modified":"2024-07-08T13:13:08","modified_gmt":"2024-07-08T11:13:08","slug":"abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/","title":{"rendered":"Autokoper krijgt meer schadevergoeding dan hij betaalde"},"content":{"rendered":"

Uitspraak tegen Daimler in emissieschandaal.<\/h2>\n\n\n

Het plaatsen van illegale manipulatie-instrumenten in dieselvoertuigen is een opzettelijke en immorele daad. Getroffen autokopers hebben daarom recht op schadevergoeding. Ook het Landgericht Bonn volgde dit juridische oordeel van het Bundesgerichtshof: Daimler<\/a> moet aan de koper van een Mercedes bijna 59.000 euro schadevergoeding betalen \u2013 meer dan de benadeelde partij oorspronkelijk voor de terreinwagen had betaald. Een succes voor de autokoper \u2013 en voor Rogert & Ulbrich.<\/p>\n

Als het gaat om de ontwikkeling\u00a0illegale manipulatie-apparaten<\/a>\u00a0Autofabrikanten tonen op dit gebied een verbazingwekkende creativiteit. Dat blijkt bijvoorbeeld uit het geval van een Mercedes Benz GLK 220 CDI 4matic Blue Efficiency met een OM 651-dieselmotor, die een autokoper in 2012 kocht voor ongeveer 55.500 euro.<\/p>\n\n\n

\u201cKoelvloeistof setpoint temperatuurregeling\u201d werkt alleen op de testbank<\/h3>\n\n\n

De besturingssoftware van het terreinvoertuig activeert een zogenaamde \u2018koelvloeistof-setpointtemperatuurregeling\u2019, die het koelmiddelcircuit verder koelt, de opwarming van de motorolie vertraagt en zo de uitstoot van stikstofoxide vermindert. Het voertuig is schoon, de NEEX<\/sub>-Grenswaarden worden nageleefd. Echter, alleen op de testbank. Onderweg wordt de functie uitgeschakeld en wordt de diesel een vervuiler. Het gaat om Mercedes-modellen met OM 651- en OM 642-motoren, alsmede de GLK 220 CDI 4Matic en de C-, E- en S-Klasse-modellen.<\/p>\n\n\n

KBA beveelt terugroepactie van 60.000 terreinwagens<\/h3>\n\n\n

Voor Daimler<\/a> Deze softwaremanipulatie is volkomen legaal. Dat geldt niet voor de Bundesautomobilausstellung (KBA), die deze variant van de 'schakellogica' - het eufemisme dat autofabrikanten graag gebruiken om hun frauduleuze software te verdoezelen - al in 2018 ontdekte en in eerste instantie een terugroepactie voor 60.000 GLK 220 CDI's beval. In 2019 volgde opnieuw een massale terugroepactie voor Euro 5-dieselmotoren.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n

Daimler geeft geen argumenten<\/h3>\n\n\n

De koper van de GLK 220 CDI 4matic Blue Efficiency, vertegenwoordigd door Rogert & Ulbrich, heeft bij de regionale rechtbank van Bonn ook een uittreksel uit de KBA-terugroepdatabase overgelegd als bewijs voor het bestaan van illegale shutdown-software in de vorm van een \u201ckoelmiddel-insteltemperatuurregeling\u201d. Daimler weerlegde deze specifieke bewering met de simpele bewering dat er geen dergelijke uitschakelvoorziening in het voertuig was ge\u00efnstalleerd. Voor de rechters van de Eerste Civiele Kamer van het Landgericht Bonn was dit niet voldoende.<\/p>\n\n\n

Eiser ontvangt schadevergoeding plus onrechtmatige rente, minus compensatie voor gebruik<\/h3>\n\n\n

Zij beschouwden de manipulatiesoftware als immoreel; de koper reeds schade had geleden bij het sluiten van de koopovereenkomst. Hun oordeel (20.05.2020, Az. 1 O 195\/19): Daimler<\/a> moet de auto terugnemen en aan de eiser bijna 47.000 euro schadevergoeding betalen, plus een onrechtmatige daadrente van bijna 12.000 euro. Hierdoor ontvangt de benadeelde ongeveer 4.000 euro meer dan hij destijds voor de diesel betaalde. De rechtbank heeft echter conform de uitspraak van het BGH een schadevergoeding van circa 8.500 euro in mindering gebracht voor de circa 54.000 gereden kilometers.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cWij zijn blij met de uitspraak, die we in deze vorm hadden verwacht na de uitspraak van het BGH. Het is bijzonder verheugend dat de rechtbank de benadeelde partij ook een onrechtmatige daadrente van 4 procent heeft toegekend. Talrijke regionale rechtbanken en hogere regionale rechtbanken hebben deze vordering reeds erkend. Er is echter nog steeds geen uitspraak van het hooggerechtshof over deze kwestie. Wij verwachten stellig dat het Federale Hof van Justitie in juli ook een consumentvriendelijk juridisch standpunt over dit punt zal innemen, wat andere slachtoffers zal aanmoedigen hun legitieme claims te doen gelden.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Partner Dr. Marco Rogert <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>
\n
<\/div>
\n

Misschien bent u ook ge\u00efnteresseerd in:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Rogert-Ulbrich-Rechtsanwaelte-Kanzlei-Diesel-Benzin-Preise\"\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tRecordprijzen voor diesel - Nu is het moment om uw auto terug te draaien<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/h4>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Diesel staat in Duitsland op recordhoogte en ook benzine nadert een\u2026\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tLees meer<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tVTDI-emissieschandaal waarbij VW, Audi en Porsche betrokken zijn<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/h4>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Voor veel Duitse autofabrikanten is het dieselemissieschandaal nog steeds alomtegenwoordig, ook voor de VW Groep\u2026\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tLees meer<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tAudi AG moet Porsche Cayenne S terugnemen<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/h4>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Audi AG kreeg van het Oberlandesgericht Keulen de opdracht een Porsche Cayenne S 4.2l terug te nemen\u2026.\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\tLees meer<\/a>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\n\n\n

<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/section>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Abgasskandal Urteil gegen Daimler. Illegale Abschalteinrichtungen in Diesel-Fahrzeugen sind eine vors\u00e4tzlich sittenwidrige Sch\u00e4digung. Betroffene Autok\u00e4ufer haben daher Anspruch auf Schadenersatz. Dieser Rechtsauffassung des Bundesgerichtshofs folgte […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":21,"featured_media":7581,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_uag_custom_page_level_css":"","site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"default","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"default","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[2,507],"tags":[18,133,30,35,37],"class_list":["post-2485","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-abgasskandal","category-urteile","tag-daimler","tag-mercedes","tag-om651","tag-rueckruf","tag-schadensersatz"],"yoast_head":"\nAutok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat - R&U<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Daimler muss dem K\u00e4ufer eines Mercedes 59.000 Euro Schadensersatz zahlen \u2013 mehr als der Autok\u00e4ufer urspr\u00fcnglich f\u00fcr den Wagen gezahlt hatte.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"nl_NL\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Daimler muss dem K\u00e4ufer eines Mercedes 59.000 Euro Schadensersatz zahlen \u2013 mehr als der Autok\u00e4ufer urspr\u00fcnglich f\u00fcr den Wagen gezahlt hatte.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"R&U\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/RogertUlbrich\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"675\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Marco Rogert\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@RogertUlbrich\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@RogertUlbrich\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Marco Rogert\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b020d506e6bbc471b4565d3a98173b87\"},\"headline\":\"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":545,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Daimler\",\"Mercedes\",\"OM651\",\"R\u00fcckruf\",\"Schadensersatz\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Abgasskandal\",\"Urteile\"],\"inLanguage\":\"nl-NL\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/\",\"name\":\"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat - R&U\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00\",\"description\":\"Daimler muss dem K\u00e4ufer eines Mercedes 59.000 Euro Schadensersatz zahlen \u2013 mehr als der Autok\u00e4ufer urspr\u00fcnglich f\u00fcr den Wagen gezahlt hatte.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"nl-NL\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"nl-NL\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/06\\\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":675,\"caption\":\"Mercedes-Benz Musterfeststellungsklage\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Startseite\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/\",\"name\":\"R&U\",\"description\":\"Verbraucheranw\u00e4lte\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Rogert & Ulbrich\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"nl-NL\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kanzlei Rogert & Ulbrich\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"nl-NL\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/12\\\/logo-ru-law.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/12\\\/logo-ru-law.svg\",\"width\":992,\"height\":259,\"caption\":\"Kanzlei Rogert & Ulbrich\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/RogertUlbrich\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/RogertUlbrich\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/rogertulbrich\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/rogert-ulbrich\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/channel\\\/UCganCgpvwpPFqMFf1vVmG2A\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b020d506e6bbc471b4565d3a98173b87\",\"name\":\"Marco Rogert\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/ru.law\\\/nl\\\/author\\\/rogertru-law\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Autokoper ontvangt meer compensatie dan hij betaalde - R&U","description":"Daimler moet de koper van een Mercedes 59.000 euro schadevergoeding betalen \u2013 meer dan de koper oorspronkelijk voor de auto had betaald.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/","og_locale":"nl_NL","og_type":"article","og_title":"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat","og_description":"Daimler muss dem K\u00e4ufer eines Mercedes 59.000 Euro Schadensersatz zahlen \u2013 mehr als der Autok\u00e4ufer urspr\u00fcnglich f\u00fcr den Wagen gezahlt hatte.","og_url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/","og_site_name":"R&U","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/RogertUlbrich\/","article_published_time":"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":675,"url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Marco Rogert","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@RogertUlbrich","twitter_site":"@RogertUlbrich","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/"},"author":{"name":"Marco Rogert","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#\/schema\/person\/b020d506e6bbc471b4565d3a98173b87"},"headline":"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat","datePublished":"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/"},"wordCount":545,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg","keywords":["Daimler","Mercedes","OM651","R\u00fcckruf","Schadensersatz"],"articleSection":["Abgasskandal","Urteile"],"inLanguage":"nl-NL"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/","name":"Autokoper ontvangt meer compensatie dan hij betaalde - R&U","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg","datePublished":"2020-06-08T13:32:13+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-08T11:13:08+00:00","description":"Daimler moet de koper van een Mercedes 59.000 euro schadevergoeding betalen \u2013 meer dan de koper oorspronkelijk voor de auto had betaald.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"nl-NL","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"nl-NL","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg","width":1200,"height":675,"caption":"Mercedes-Benz Musterfeststellungsklage"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/abgasskandal-urteil-gegen-daimler\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Startseite","item":"https:\/\/ru.law\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Autok\u00e4ufer erh\u00e4lt mehr Schadensersatz als er bezahlt hat"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#website","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/","name":"R&U","description":"Consumentenadvocaten","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Rogert & Ulbrich","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/ru.law\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"nl-NL"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#organization","name":"Advocatenkantoor Rogert & Ulbrich","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"nl-NL","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/logo-ru-law.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/logo-ru-law.svg","width":992,"height":259,"caption":"Kanzlei Rogert & Ulbrich"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/RogertUlbrich\/","https:\/\/x.com\/RogertUlbrich","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/rogertulbrich\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/rogert-ulbrich\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCganCgpvwpPFqMFf1vVmG2A"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/ru.law\/#\/schema\/person\/b020d506e6bbc471b4565d3a98173b87","name":"Marco Rogert","url":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/author\/rogertru-law\/"}]}},"uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg",1200,675,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1-150x150.jpg",96,96,true],"medium":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1-300x169.jpg",300,169,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1-768x432.jpg",768,432,true],"large":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1-1024x576.jpg",1024,576,true],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg",1200,675,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg",1200,675,false],"trp-custom-language-flag":["https:\/\/ru.law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/daimler-diesel-fahrzeug-1.jpg",18,10,false]},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"Marco Rogert","author_link":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/author\/rogertru-law\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"Abgasskandal Urteil gegen Daimler. Illegale Abschalteinrichtungen in Diesel-Fahrzeugen sind eine vors\u00e4tzlich sittenwidrige Sch\u00e4digung. Betroffene Autok\u00e4ufer haben daher Anspruch auf Schadenersatz. Dieser Rechtsauffassung des Bundesgerichtshofs folgte […]","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2485","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/21"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2485\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7581"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ru.law\/nl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}