A court in The Hague has ordered Jaguar Land Rover to destroy digital files it seized from BYD's Dutch offices in August. The ruling hands the Chinese carmaker the first win in a dispute over whether its Ti7 SUV copies the Land Rover Defender. The decision, given on 11 November, lifted an evidence seizure that JLR had obtained without BYD first being heard in court.
The ruling does not settle the central question. JLR's claims that the Ti7 infringes its rights in the Defender's design are being pursued in separate proceedings, and no court has made any finding of infringement. JLR's chief executive, PB Balaji, used his first public comments on the case to say the company "does not accept the infringement of our intellectual property". The commercial stakes are clear. The Ti7 is due to reach UK customers in January 2027, priced about £20,000 below a comparable Defender.
What the court decided
At JLR's request, court bailiffs entered BYD's offices in Schiedam and Hoofddorp in August and copied records. Under Dutch law, this kind of evidence seizure lets a claimant secure material before it can be lost, and it can be granted without the other side being present. According to Motor1 and Electrifying.com, the material included Ti7 launch plans, technical data and financial records.
BYD challenged the scope of the seizure. Its lawyers called it a "fishing expedition" that had swept up confidential business documents unrelated to the dispute. The presiding judge, Hugo van Heemstra, largely agreed. According to electrive, the court found the files were not needed to prove the alleged breach of EU design rights in the Defender. Nor were they needed to work out damages, because BYD has not yet sold the Ti7 in the European Union.
JLR must destroy or return the material within 24 hours of formal notice of the ruling, and make sure that no one other than BYD can access it. If it fails to comply, it faces a penalty of €50,000 per hour, capped at €500,000, according to electrive and Motor1. The court also rejected JLR's demand for €500,000 in penalty payments from BYD, finding that BYD had cooperated during the seizure. JLR must pay BYD €25,376.57 (about £21,100) towards its legal costs.
Both sides on the record
Speaking on a call with journalists reported by Autocar, Mr Balaji said JLR's vehicles rested on "decades of heritage, engineering, excellence". He added: "Therefore we will do what it takes to protect them." He also said the seized files were no longer needed, because BYD has since announced its sales plans for the Ti7 in Europe.
JLR alleges that the Ti7 is a "slavish imitation" of the Defender, according to Auto Express. Several outlets, including electrive and CarNewsChina, citing The Guardian, report that JLR suspects BYD took apart a Defender to study its technology. Neither claim has been tested in court. JLR told Auto Express that it does not comment on ongoing legal proceedings. A BYD UK spokesperson also declined to comment, citing the proceedings.
The legal fight runs on two tracks. In The Hague, JLR alleges infringement of its EU design rights in the Defender. In Rotterdam, it alleges copyright infringement and unfair imitation under Dutch law. Neither case has been decided.
A Fangchengbao Ti7 show car at the Singapore Motorshow in January 2026. Photo: S5A-0043 / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0.
Why the Ti7 matters to JLR
BYD has sold the Ti7 in China under its Fang Cheng Bao brand since September 2025. CarNewsChina gives a launch price there of 179,800 yuan for the plug-in hybrid. At almost five metres long, the car has entered China's top ten best-sellers this year, according to Autocar. Its upright front, square wheel arches and blacked-out pillars echo the Defender's styling.
The UK model is a seven-seat plug-in hybrid. It pairs a 1.5-litre turbocharged petrol engine with electric motors for a combined 300kW. BYD quotes up to 119km (74 miles) of electric range on the WLTP test cycle from a 35.6kWh battery. It costs from £47,995, against £68,465 for a seven-seat Defender 110.
The Defender is JLR's most important model. It sold 28,465 units worldwide in the quarter to the end of September, up 16 per cent, according to Autocar. In China, however, its sales fell 39 per cent over the same three months. Autocar did not tie that fall to any single rival. Even so, the figures show the Defender losing ground in China.
JLR is also building Defender into a wider brand. It has confirmed a smaller Defender, with electric and hybrid versions, for launch in 2027. Mark Cameron, managing director of the Defender and Discovery brands, told Autocar: "My job is to make sure we retain Defender's DNA, otherwise we become another SUV brand and there are plenty of those." In Hemera's analysis, a brand that depends this heavily on a recognisable shape gives JLR a strong reason to fight cheaper lookalikes.
A mixed record against lookalikes
JLR has won such a fight before. In 2019, a court in China ordered Jiangling Motors to stop making the Landwind X7, which closely resembled the Range Rover Evoque, and to pay JLR ¥1.5m in damages. The outcome was different at home. In 2020, the UK High Court dismissed JLR's appeal over its bid to register the old Defender's shape as a trademark. That decision cleared the way for Ineos to sell its similar-looking Grenadier.
Other carmakers have blocked Chinese copies in Europe. In 2008, Fiat stopped Great Wall's Peri, which it said looked too much like the Panda. That year BMW also halted sales of the Shuanghuan CEO, an SUV that it argued was a clone of its X5. The Dutch case rests on design rights and copyright rather than trademarks. These are different legal tests from the one JLR failed in 2020.
What to watch
The main hearing. Autocar, and Automotive News as cited by CarExpert, report that the case is expected to be heard later in November. No date has been publicly confirmed.
A possible appeal. According to Motor1, the order takes effect immediately, so JLR must comply even if it challenges the ruling.
The Ti7 launch. The car is set to reach UK showrooms this month, with customer deliveries from January 2027. That timing means it could be on sale before the design claims are resolved.
The UK question. The Dutch cases concern EU design rights and Dutch law. No report indicates that JLR has started proceedings over the Ti7 in Britain.
