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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll