On January 13, according to a New York Times article, Renault filed a criminal compaint with the Office of the Public Prosecutor in Paris, alleging that a foreign company tried to obtain secrets relating to Renault’s electric-car program. Renault previously had suspended three of its executives, whom it suspected of seeking to pass on data relating to the electric-car program, and reportedly had scheduled disciplinary hearings on January 11. After a French Member of Parliament publicly intimated “that a Chinese intermediary had sought to obtain secrets from the three Renault executives,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman responded with a statement that such charges were “totally baseless and irresponsible.”
This post was originally published on the legacy ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Notice and Comment blog, which merged with the Yale Journal on Regulation Notice and Comment blog in 2015.
On January 13, according to a New York Times article, Renault filed a criminal compaint with the Office of the Public Prosecutor in Paris, alleging that a foreign company tried to obtain secrets relating to Renault’s electric-car program. Renault previously had suspended three of its executives, whom it suspected of seeking to pass on data relating to the electric-car program, and reportedly had scheduled disciplinary hearings on January 11. After a French Member of Parliament publicly intimated “that a Chinese intermediary had sought to obtain secrets from the three Renault executives,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman responded with a statement that such charges were “totally baseless and irresponsible.”
This post was originally published on the legacy ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Notice and Comment blog, which merged with the Yale Journal on Regulation Notice and Comment blog in 2015.