London Taxi Company to take legal action against Metrocab's new Low Emission alternative cab.

London Taxi Company, which builds the UK capital's iconic black cabs, is taking legal action against a low-emission alternative, saying the similar design would confuse drivers and customers.

The company said the Metrocab plug-in hybrid breached its trademarks. Frazer-Nash Research and Ecotive said last month they would start production of the new Metrocab in 2016, in partnership with privately held manufacturer Multimatic Holdings.

"It is actually all about the shape," said Douglas Campbell, a lawyer for the London Taxi Company, at a London court hearing ahead of a November trial.

London Taxi Company's owner, China’s Geely Automobile Holdings, is investing 250 million pounds ($387 million) in a new factory in Coventry, England, to build a greener plug-in hybrid version of its new black cab.

Frazer-Nash Research and Ecotive are building a 50 million-pound factory near Coventry.

"The identity of the manufacturer of the car is a matter of supreme indifference to the passenger," Frazer-Nash said in documents at a London court hearing. Officials at the London Taxi Company declined to comment. A spokesman for Frazer-Nash didn't immediately respond to emails and phone calls seeking comment.

London Mayor Boris Johnson announced last year that all of the city's new taxis should be able to operate as zero-emission vehicles by 2018 as part of efforts to reduce pollution.

Drivers of black cabs must pass a four-year training program called the "knowledge" to demonstrate their understanding of the city's 25,000 streets. Each cab driver essentially runs a small business, buying or renting vehicles, licensed by London's transport authority.

The London Taxi Company manufactures the majority of black cabs. Frazer-Nash's zero-emission Metrocab is currently undergoing trials in the city.

REPORT HERE

Henrik Fisker drops plans for a new Supercar after legal action from Aston Martin.

Aston Martin has put the brakes on Henrik Fisker’s return to the auto industry. Fisker, sued by Aston Martin late last month over plans to produce a $400,000 supercar called the Thunderbolt, has agreed to drop those plans to settle the suit.

He claimed the Thunderbolt was based on the current Aston Martin Vanquish, a V-12 powered supercar that was to have been modified with custom styling and cosmetic features.

Fisker showed the Thunderbolt at the Amelia Island Concours d’ Elegance classic-car show and auction last month and said he planned to market the vehicle through Galpin Aston Martin, a California dealer.

Aston Martin -- where Fisker was once design director -- said not so fast and sued Fisker on March 27, claiming the Thunderbolt infringed on Aston Martin’s intellectual property rights. In a statement released on Wednesday, Aston said the suit has been dismissed after Fisker agreed to drop the project.

Late last year, Fisker reworked a new Ford Mustang to test the waters for a custom version of that car.

Before Fisker founded his own company, Fisker Automotive, to produce the Fisker Karma, he modified BMWs. He produced the Fisker Tramonto and Latigo. Few were sold.

Richard Truett

REPORT HERE

North Shields garage owner ordered to drop 'Jaguar' from company name

Alan has run Alan Carr Jaguar Services for 14 years, but has now been told he is no longer allowed to use "Jaguar" in his company name.

Garage owner Alan Carr has hatched a cunning plan to win his battle with car giant Jaguar – changing his name to mirror his business.

Alan has run Alan Carr Jaguar Services for 14 years, but has now been told he is no longer allowed to use “Jaguar” in his company name.

He has vowed to take on the big boys and may change his name by deed poll to Mr Alan Carr Jaguar Services in a bid to thwart the motor giant.

Jaguar claims he has infringed their trademark and has told him to think of a neutral name.

Alan, 52, said: “I have been running this business for years providing servicing for Jaguars because I love the car. I am an enthusiast who has built up a business around his interest. It will never make me a fortune but I have a small number of clients who come to me by word of mouth and like what I do.

“I have a website which uses my company name and I have had plastic business cards printed, which were not cheap, but I have never passed myself off as Jaguar. And I have just invested in a new diagnostic system as used by main dealerships, which cost a lot of money, and then this hits me.”

Alan, of North Shields, does not know what triggered Jaguar’s approach but is determined to put up a fight.

He said: “I received a letter from their lawyers telling me to change my trading name. I went back to them asking if I could use Jag instead of Jaguar but they said that was still not acceptable. This is a blow not just to my business but to my love of Jaguar cars all my life. I am going to see a lawyer of my own and have even thought about changing by own name by deed pool to Alan Carr Jaguar Services.”

A spokesperson from Jaguar Land Rover suggested they would not be backing down. She said: “It would be inappropriate to comment about specific cases but we need to protect our trademark to maintain our reputation as a premium automotive manufacturer for our customers.”

TMW THOUGHTS

These days everyone wants to sue everyone else, and it is getting extremely boring, the way big companies want to dictate everything should be taken with a pinch of salt, but when you are using a trade name to promote  your own business, do they have the right, well, yes, but is it right to do so, again, in some cases, yes it is.

However, unless there is something more to this story that we are not privy too, it seems a little strange that a small business that does nothing but promote the products of JLR, and keeps existing products on the roads for longer, is being brow beaten by this large corporate entity, So, as it stands, based on the info in the piece, i feel that JLR are being a little picky, this guy is doing a job, to make a living, and keeping our cars on the roads at a price that means it is feasible to do so.

For those that are not aware, we here at TMW, love JLR, it is our brand of choice, and we will continue to blatantly promote them for all we are worth, but it still does not mean I wont say something is not right if I believe to be so, IF, there is more to this story, then fair enough, but to be honest JLR, you have had 14 years to do this, why now ?