header-logo header-logo

17 July 2024
Issue: 8080 / Categories: Legal News , Local government , Transport
printer mail-detail

Private taxi operators take on Uber

Uber has lost its case against private hire vehicle operators over contract terms, in a decision with major financial implications for both local authorities and taxi companies

The Court of Appeal handed down judgment this week, in DELTA Merseyside and Veezu holdings v Uber Britannia [2024] EWCA Civ 802, overturning a High Court ruling last July that operators must enter as principal into a contract with passengers.

Intervening in the High Court case, private hire operators warned passengers would have to pay VAT on journeys, potentially raising fares by 20%.

Both DELTA and Veezu use an app to manage bookings, acting as intermediary between driver and passenger. Drivers pay DELTA a fee, called a ‘settle’, for putting them in touch with a customer. Veezu also provides services for school runs and medical transportation.

Lord Justice Lewison, giving the main judgment, said: ‘A booking may not necessarily specify any journey; or even be made for a journey at all.

‘A vehicle may be booked simply to be on stand-by. It is thus plain (and indeed is now common ground) that the declaration made by the judge is inappropriate. It assumes that the booking is made by "the passenger", which is not necessarily the case, and it assumes that the contract is one "to provide the journey" which is also not necessarily the case.’

Layla Barke-Jones, dispute resolution partner at Aaron & Partners, representing Delta Taxis, said the decision was ‘a victory for the taxi industry and all those who depend on it.

‘This frequently includes the disabled, elderly and low-income households. This was a landmark case, the result of which could have had a terrible impact on the lives of so many people—not to mention the administrative burden for operators.’

The case does not affect London, where different taxi regulations apply.

Issue: 8080 / Categories: Legal News , Local government , Transport
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll