header-logo header-logo

06 August 2025
Issue: 8128 / Categories: Legal News , Transport , Tax , Local government
printer mail-detail

Minicabs soar past Uber’s roadblock

Private hire vehicle companies have seen off Uber’s legal challenge to their business models, in a landmark Supreme Court decision

The court unanimously rejected Uber’s argument that private hire operators enter into individual contracts of hire with passengers, which would have resulted in VAT being charged on all fares, in DELTA Merseyside and Veezu Holdings v Uber Britannia [2025] UKSC 31. Consequently, the private hire companies can continue to operate as agents for their drivers.

DELTA had warned the extra 20% on fares would make them unaffordable for many passengers, with ‘seismic consequences’ for the industry as well as increased costs for the NHS, education authorities and other public bodies.

DELTA successfully argued that the regulatory regime outside London and Plymouth laid down in Part II of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 allows for multiple business models. The court agreed that, while Uber’s model does trigger VAT liability, competitors can lawfully operate using alternative structures that do not.

Layla Barke Jones, partner at Aaron & Partners, representing DELTA, said: ‘This ruling ensures that operators can continue to operate under established, regulated models that have been in existence since regulation was introduced almost half a century ago.

‘Private hire firms are vital in the communities, and are used frequently by those with disabilities, low-income households and older people who rely on taxis for essential journeys and to maintain their independence. If VAT suddenly had to be paid by all those people, the additional cost would have meant many simply choose not to travel at all, leaving some of the most vulnerable people in our society isolated.

‘A crisis has been averted.’

Nia Cooper, chief legal officer at Veezu, said the ruling ‘confirms that operators can continue to choose which business model they adopt to run their business’ and also ‘shows that British-owned businesses can stand up against global giants that attempt to use litigation as a tactic to shape the sector to suit their business model’.

Issue: 8128 / Categories: Legal News , Transport , Tax , Local government
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll