GM asks judge to reinstate racketeering case against rival Fiat Chrysler
By Nick Carey and Sanjana Shivdas
Aug 3 (Reuters) - General Motors Co GM.N on Monday asked a U.S. federal judge to reinstate a racketeering lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA) <FCHA.MI> FCAU.N, saying it has new information on foreign accounts used in an alleged bribery scheme involving its smaller rival and union leaders.
In the filing, with U.S. District Judge Paul Borman, GM says the scheme, which it alleges occurred between FCA executives and former United Auto Workers (UAW) leaders, "is much broader and deeper than previously suspected or revealed as it involved FCA Group apparently using various accounts in foreign countries ... to control corrupt individuals by compensating and corrupting those centrally involved in the scheme to harm GM."
Last month, Borman threw out the racketeering lawsuit, saying the No. 1 U.S. automaker's alleged injuries were not caused by FCA's alleged violations.
GM alleged that its rival bribed UAW officials over many years to corrupt the bargaining process and gain advantages, costing GM billions of dollars. GM was seeking "substantial damages" that one analyst said could have totaled at least $6 billion. FCA called the case meritless and asked Borman to dismiss it.
"These new facts warrant amending the court's prior judgment, so we are respectfully asking the court to reinstate the case," GM said in a statement.
FCA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In affidavits accompanying GM's filing, attorneys for the automaker said that "reliable information concerning the existence of foreign bank accounts" used in the alleged scheme had only come to light within the last 10 days.
(Reporting by Sanjana Shivdas in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber and Steve Orlofsky)
((SanjanaSitara.Shivdas@thomsonreuters.com; within U.S. +1 646 223 8780, outside U.S. +91 80 6749 1642; Twitter: @SanjanaShivdas;))
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.