Why has the judge allowed Kevin Mackie's case against Renault, Nissan and RCI to go ahead?
Judge rejects attempt to strike out Mackie Motors' claim – what does this mean for UK car dealers and legal processes?
Background to the dispute
Kevin Mackie, the owner of Mackie Motors, is once again facing a High Court hearing after a judge refused an application to dismiss his claim against Renault, Nissan and RCI Financial Services (now Mobilise Financial Services). The dispute dates back to 2021 when the three respondents withdrew Mackie Motors' banking facilities and access to essential dealer systems with only seven days’ notice, citing internal suspicions of money‑laundering.
Mackie strongly denies any wrongdoing and describes the allegations as "unfounded". Within weeks of the shutdown, the business was sold in a distressed transaction.
What the respondents alleged
Renault, Nissan and RCI sought to have the case struck out, arguing that the current proceedings merely repeat matters already decided in earlier litigation. They characterised Mackie Motors’ claim as an "abuse of the court process" and accused the dealer of re‑litigating the same facts under new legal theories after a previous case had been decided in favour of RCI.
Judge Lance Ashworth KC’s ruling
In a written judgment handed down on 17 August, Judge Lance Ashworth KC rejected the application to dismiss the claim. He concluded that the case does not constitute an abuse of the court process and that shutting Mackie Motors out would be erroneous because the issues being raised have not been previously adjudicated.
The judge highlighted a "powerful factor": Renault and Nissan were not parties to the earlier claim. He added that there was no evidence the new proceedings were "oppressive or amount to unjust harassment" of the manufacturers.
Quote from the judgment: "It is not appropriate to shut out MMBL (Mackie Motors (Brechin) Limited) from litigating for the first time a question which has not previously been adjudicated upon on this basis." He further noted that the current action against RCI is not a repackaging of old facts but an entirely new case based on evidence unavailable at the time of the previous claim.
Kevin Mackie’s reaction
Kevin Mackie welcomed the decision, stating that the ruling allows him to continue pursuing the dispute. He told Car Dealer Magazine: "They are trying to make the innocent the guilty party when we have done nothing wrong. It has caused a lot of pain for my family – if they had just given us two years’ notice it would have worked through the issues."
Mackie added that he is now looking forward to obtaining the disclosures he has never seen – communications between Renault, Nissan and RCI that he believes are central to his case. He also stressed that the matter is about accountability at the highest level, not merely about legal tactics.
Witnesses and testimony
It has been confirmed that SNP MP Dave Doogan, Mackie’s local MP, will appear as a key witness for Mackie Motors. The firm also intends to call former managing directors from Renault UK and Nissan GB, as well as senior executives from RCI Financial Services, to give evidence.
Potential appeals and next steps
Renault has acknowledged the judge’s decision and said it will consider an appeal. A Renault spokesperson said: "We acknowledge the judge's decision to allow the case to proceed to a further hearing and will now evaluate our options, including a potential appeal of today's ruling."
RCI Financial Services issued a similar statement, confirming they are reviewing the judgment and the possibility of an appeal. Nissan, meanwhile, remains confident that the claims will be dismissed at trial, noting that the judge indicated the claims are likely to fail but should not be dismissed summarily at this stage.
What this ruling means for UK car dealers
The judgment sets a precedent that dealers can challenge the withdrawal of banking facilities and system access, even when earlier litigation has involved some of the same parties. By confirming that new evidence can give rise to fresh claims, the decision may encourage other dealers to seek full disclosure when they believe they have been unfairly treated by manufacturers or finance providers.
For the broader industry, the case underscores the importance of transparent communication and documented decision‑making within OEM and finance groups. It also highlights the potential legal costs and reputational risk associated with abrupt termination of dealer relationships.
Future hearing dates
A specific date for the full trial has not yet been set. All parties remain active, and further hearings are expected as the case moves towards a final resolution.
You can follow the entire Mackie Motors saga by searching for "Kevin Mackie" on Car Dealer Magazine’s website.