Toyota Foundation Sued Over 3-Wheel EV in Africa

Toyota Motor Corporation, through its philanthropic Toyota Mobility Foundation (TMF), has been taken to federal court in the United States over allegations that it misappropriated trade secrets and intellectual property from a small Zimbabwean social enterprise. The lawsuit, filed on May 12 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, centers on the “Hamba” — a solar-powered, three-wheeled electric tricycle designed specifically for rural African communities.

The Hamba: A Purpose-Built African Innovation

The Hamba (meaning “go” in several African languages) is no ordinary vehicle. Built for the harsh realities of rural Africa, it features a cargo bed capable of carrying up to 400 kg (880 lbs), swappable batteries, solar charging capabilities, and a bench seat designed for women wearing skirts. According to The Automotive Data, the vehicle is assembled in Harare, Zimbabwe, and represents years of field testing and community-driven design.

Mobility for Africa (MFA), the women-led social enterprise behind the Hamba, was founded by Shantha Bloemen, a 21-year veteran of UNICEF. The organization developed the e-trike through extensive pilot testing in rural Zimbabwe, with direct input from local women farmers and entrepreneurs who needed affordable, reliable transportation to reach markets, clinics, and schools.

The Allegations: Partnership Turned Exploitation

According to the complaint, the partnership between MFA and TMF began in 2019 when TMF President Shin Aoyama visited MFA’s project in Wedza District, Zimbabwe. Over the following years, MFA alleges it shared confidential information — including business methodologies, infrastructure strategies, deployment models, and proprietary research — under promises of a joint venture.

As EVWorld.com reports, MFA claims that TMF froze funding, excluded MFA from projects, and began independently replicating MFA’s systems. When Bloemen raised concerns directly with TMF, she was allegedly ignored. The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, and injunctive relief preventing continued use of MFA’s intellectual property.

Legal Claims and Representation

The case, formally titled Mobility for Africa v. Toyota Mobility Foundation, et al. (Case No. 2:26-cv-05105), alleges breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets. MFA is represented by Michael J. Bowe, Lauren Tabaksblat, and Heidi R. Goldsmith of Brithem LLP, along with David M. Stein and Nancy M. Olson of Olson Stein LLP in Newport Beach, California.

Michael J. Bowe, lead counsel for MFA, stated: “The defendants lacked meaningful prior operational experience in the specific rural African mobility environments where MFA had already established successful systems. Rather than supporting existing African-led innovation, the defendants allegedly appropriated the work for reputational and commercial advantage.”

A Pattern of Extraction?

The case has drawn attention far beyond the automotive industry because it touches on deeper tensions in the global clean mobility sector. Shantha Bloemen highlighted the systemic challenges facing women entrepreneurs in Africa, noting that “women entrepreneurs everywhere receive only a fraction of startup capital compared to men, and in Africa it’s even harder because most impact funding goes to a handful of markets and a handful of companies, almost all of which are led by men.”

As Mobility for Africa’s website details, the organization has raised $2 million in seed capital and built a comprehensive ecosystem that includes the Hamba e-trike, off-grid solar charging infrastructure, battery swapping stations, and a community-based operating model. By 2025, the Hamba project had gained international recognition, winning the Live Innovation Grant at Expo Dubai, the EEP Africa Project of the Year Award, and the Ashden Award for Access to Energy, along with a nomination for Prince William’s Earthshot Prize.

Broader Implications

The lawsuit raises fundamental questions about who benefits from the electric vehicle transition in the Global South. Critics argue the case exemplifies “green colonialism” — the concern that global sustainability initiatives may replicate historical patterns of extraction, with Northern institutions taking value from Southern innovation.

As the EVWorld.com editorial team put it: “If the allegations hold, Toyota didn’t just take a design. It took a story — one written by women who refused to wait for the world’s automakers to notice them. The courts will decide the legal questions. But the moral one is already clear: electrification means nothing if it repeats the old patterns of extraction.”

What’s Next

As of June 20, 2026, Toyota has not issued a public statement responding to the specific allegations. The case is expected to attract significant attention from stakeholders across the electric vehicle industry, the impact investment community, and the international development sector. Given the reputational stakes for one of the world’s largest automakers, a confidential settlement remains possible — though MFA’s pursuit of injunctive relief suggests a desire for structural remedies beyond monetary compensation.

The outcome could reshape how multinational corporations engage with grassroots innovators in emerging markets, potentially leading to stronger legal protections for social enterprises developing transformative technologies in resource-constrained environments.