|
It
comes after a Quebec judge in December ordered Honeywell to
share records containing engine pricing information with an
independent auditor, creating a stir within the discrete world
of business jet manufacturing, industry sources said.
The Quebec Court of Appeal last month refused Honeywell's
request to immediately hear the case.
Honeywell "intends to pursue relief before the Supreme Court of
Canada in the appropriate time," the company said in an emailed
statement to Reuters. Canada's Supreme Court selects which cases
it hears and it is unclear whether Honeywell will succeed in its
efforts.
Bombardier, which uses Honeywell engines in its popular
Challenger 350 business jets, has alleged the U.S. supplier of
was selling propulsion systems to its rivals on more favorable
terms, despite guarantees that the Canadian planemaker would get
the best price, according to court filings.
Engine pricing, a key cost in business jet production, often
comes with steep discounts and is guarded closely between
suppliers and planemakers to avoid giving a competitive
advantage to rivals.
The court order is raising fears that an audit could reveal
sensitive information about rivals like Textron Inc and General
Dynamics Corp's Gulfstream Aerospace, according to filings and
sources.
It is the latest dispute over such concerns in aerospace.
A recent court dispute between Airbus and Qatar Airways
triggered a three-way battle with Boeing over who could see one
of the U.S. planemaker’s contracts with the airline.
Such court cases, which were relatively rare before the
pandemic, have shone a spotlight on the inner workings of the
$150 billion global jet industry.
In its February 15 decision, the Quebec Court of Appeal also
refused Cessna business jet maker Textron's request to act as an
intervenor. Textron had argued that steps like using an auditor
don't adequately protect information "which risks being found in
the hands of its rivals, primarily Bombardier," filings show.
Textron and Gulfstream declined comment.
Bombardier said it welcomed the February 15 decision by the
Court of Appeal, in line with the original ruling and would
contest any motion to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court
of Canada.
(Reporting By Allison Lampert in Montreal, Additional reporting
by Tim Hepher in Paris, Editing by Nick Zieminski; Editing by
Denny Thomas and Nick Zieminski)
[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|
