header-logo header-logo

30 October 2015
Issue: 7674 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Transport

Transport for London v Uber London Ltd and others [2015] EWHC 2918 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 137 (Oct)

The claimant Transport for London sought a declaration that the first defendants, Uber, network private hire vehicles (PHVs) were not equipped with a taximeter in contravention of s 11 of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998. The Administrative Court, in granting a declaration, held that Uber’s PHVs were not equipped with a taximeter as defined by s 11(3) of the Act. The driver’s smartphone with a driver’s app was not a device for calculating fare by itself or in conjunction with a server and even if it was, the vehicle was not equipped with it.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

mfg Solicitors—Hannah Finnegan

mfg Solicitors—Hannah Finnegan

Law firm strengthens private client team to support continued growth

Devonshires—Andrew Cromb

Devonshires—Andrew Cromb

Devonshires expands offering with appointment of tax partner Andrew Cromb

Freeths—John Jones

Freeths—John Jones

Freeths strengthens senior leadership team with Chief Technology Officer appointment

NEWS
Mr Justice Nicklin’s decision to order costs on an indemnity basis may be a ‘significant win’ but it’s still ‘far from game, set and match’ for Associated Newspapers, a former costs judge has said
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
back-to-top-scroll