Global auto giant, General Motors Daewoo has sued a Chinese car-maker for allegedly copying the design of Matiz, one of its small car and is demanding a compensation of nearly $10 million.
The Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court said that it has accepted a lawsuit filed by General Motors Daewoo against China's Chery Automobile Company.
GM is asking for compensation of 80 million yuan ($9.6 million), China Daily reported.
GM Daewoo contends that Chery's mini car, 'QQ' copied its Matiz and Spark.
Chery denies this, saying it developed QQ on its own. The South Korean plaintiff initially began suing the Chinese automaker in December last year at the Shanghai No 2 Intermediate People's Court.
However, the defendant objected on jurisdiction grounds. The Supreme People's Court appointed the Beijing-based court to handle the case, sources in the press office of the Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court said.
Produced by GM Daewoo, the Matiz went on the South Korean market in 1998.
GM Daewoo authorised the Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation in 2003 to produce and sell the Spark on the Chinese mainland on the basis of the design and technology of the Matiz.
However, GM Daewoo claimed their investigation results showed the Chery QQ shared a remarkably identical body structure, exterior design, interior design and key components.
"Chery even used a camouflaged Matiz car to pass auto tests to acquire authorisation from the government over production and sales of QQ," the plaintiff said.
GM Daewoo claimed the behaviour of Chery had resulted in unfair competition.
Last year, Chinese vice-minister of commerce, Zhang Zhigang said Chery's alleged infringement and unfair competitive behaviour could not be determined according to the Chinese law and evidence provided by GM Daewoo.
The vice-director of the State Intellectual Property Office, Zhang Qin, also said that GM Daewoo failed to apply for a patent on its designs in China. Thus, the technology was not protected in China according to the law.
The official also said that only when GM Daewoo had provided sufficient evidence to prove that Chery stole statistics from it could the alleged infringement exist, despite the similarities between the two cars.
