Top EU court rules Uber IS a taxi service and should be regulated like a taxi company not an app

  • European judges ordered Uber to ‘play by the same rules as everybody else’
  • US-based company has insisted that the ruling will not affect its UK operation 
  • It is locked in a legal battle to be allowed to keep operating in the capital 

Uber was brought down to size yesterday when a court ruled it was a transport company and not a digital service.

In a major blow to the taxi-hailing firm, European judges effectively ordered it to ‘play by the same rules as everybody else’.

However the US-based company was defiant last night and insisted the European Court of Justice ruling would not affect its UK operation.

Scroll down for video. 

The EU's top court has ruled Uber is a taxi service and should be regulated like a taxi company rather than an app

The EU's top court has ruled Uber is a taxi service and should be regulated like a taxi company rather than an app

Critics said the EU court’s decision will now force it to comply with national regulations that it has previously been able to ignore. The decision came only a day after the company was accused in court in London of becoming a menace to public safety by forcing its drivers to work exhausting hours.

The tech firm is locked in a legal battle to be allowed to keep operating in the capital, after Transport for London decided not to renew its licence.

The Uber app enables its users to book cars using smartphones and is available in more than 40 towns and cities across the UK. Some 3.5million passengers and 40,000 drivers use it in London alone.

Uber Q&A: What does this court ruling mean for them? 

 What does this judgment mean?

Uber will no longer be classed as a digital company, which lets it benefit from more generous EU rules.

Instead, it will be treated as a taxi operator subject to national regulations, requiring it to use only licensed drivers, potentially apply background checks and meet health and safety standards.

How big a blow is this for Uber?

The decision is the latest rebuke for the Silicon Valley firm, which regards itself as an ‘information society service’, merely connecting passengers to a network of cabbies using its smartphone app. After years of legal disputes across Europe, the European Court of Justice’s irreversible decision will limit Uber’s expansion plans by forcing it to comply with each country’s rules.

It also kills off its beleaguered peer-to-peer service, called UberPOP, which allowed customers to hail a ride from a non-professional driver.

But while many EU states have taken a tough stance against the company, other countries are free to relax conditions and open the door to Uber in the future.

What will it mean for UK users?

Uber already follows UK regulations that force it to use licensed drivers.

It has insisted the ruling ‘will not change things’ in countries such as Britain, but it will prove embarrassing as it appeals against Transport for London’s refusal to renew its licence in the capital.

British trade union leaders said yesterday that the court’s decision should lead to a review of how the company treats its drivers, following claims of punishing working conditions.

But Uber has been beset with claims of sexual assault by its drivers, a lack of background checks and the fact its drivers get no rights to a living wage, paid holidays, overtime or sick leave.

Last night union boss Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the TUC, welcomed the European court ruling. She said: ‘Uber must get its house in order and play by the same rules as everybody else. Their drivers are not commodities. They deserve at the very least the minimum wage and holiday pay.

‘Advances in technology should be used to make work better. Not to return to the type of working practices we thought we’d seen the back of decades ago.’

Before yesterday’s judgment, Uber had insisted it was merely a computer service that simply connects drivers on a smartphone app. The San Francisco-based company argued it was an ‘information society service’ that should be subject to loose EU rules covering digital companies, rather than rules covering transport which are much tighter. For example, drivers of passengers are required by law to take regular breaks.

The case, heard in Luxembourg's European Court of Justice, is yet another blow for Uber, which has drawn the fury of taxi drivers and officials around the world for flouting local regulations (file picture)

The case, heard in Luxembourg's European Court of Justice, is yet another blow for Uber, which has drawn the fury of taxi drivers and officials around the world for flouting local regulations (file picture)

And it's far from its first problem with the law... 

In 2014, cabbies in Atlanta, Georgia, began a class action against Uber.

Uber arrived in London in 2012 – and within three years its drivers outnumbered black cab drivers.

In 2016, checks on its drivers in the capital and medical certificates were found to be invalid, elsewhere it was caught using software that let them dodge enforcement officials.

Sexual harassment and sexism were also reported in the upper echelons of the US company.

In October 2016, a UK employment tribunal said Uber drivers, who have no right to a living wage, sick leave, paid holiday or overtime, should be treated as staff. Uber appealed.

This September, it lost its licence in London over ‘public safety and security’, although it was allowed to continue operating while it appeals.

Last month Uber said 2.7million UK customers’ details were hacked.

Sheffield and York suspended Uber’s operations this month.

Westminster magistrates were told this week that exhausted Uber drivers were a threat to safety.

An Uber driver allegedly admitted the murder and attempted rape of British embassy worker Rebecca Dykes in Beirut this week.

But the Luxembourg court dismissed Uber’s argument and said it was ‘much more than an intermediation service’. It said that the entire taxi operation hinged on the app, which it said was ‘indispensable’ for both the drivers and the passengers.

The case against Uber arose after a complaint by a Barcelona taxi drivers’ association determined to prevent it from setting up in the Spanish city.

They accused Uber of gaining a commercial advantage and said that it should be forced to apply for licences like any other taxi operating in the city. Uber has played down any likely impact, saying it already complies with many national rules. But the ruling will pile pressure on the company after a year in which its CEO has resigned, it has faced accusations of sexual harassment and lost a cache of customer data.

Yesterday’s case involved a service called UberPOP which connects passengers with non-professional drivers who do not hold individual licences – a system which does not operate in the UK. The operation has proved hugely controversial and been declared illegal in Italy, Spain and Germany.

In a statement, Uber said that the ruling ‘will not change things in most EU countries’ claiming that it already complies with most transportation laws.

It's risky to use them, says minister after murder 

Rebecca Dykes, 30, (pictured) was sexually assaulted and strangled after taking an Uber home from a bar in Beirut

Rebecca Dykes, 30, (pictured) was sexually assaulted and strangled after taking an Uber home from a bar in Beirut

A Lebanese minister yesterday warned against taking ‘risky’ Ubers after one of the firm’s drivers was accused of murdering a British diplomat.

Nohad Machnouk urged passengers to stick to ‘safer’ taxi firms, following the news that Rebecca Dykes, 30, was sexually assaulted and strangled after taking an Uber home from a bar in Beirut.

The interior minister said that unlike traditional taxi services, Uber was a ‘virtual’ entity. ‘I urge all Lebanese not to use this means [of transport] because we don’t consider it safe,’ he said. ‘Dealing with Uber is risky and it is better we return to traditional ways.’

Mr Machnouk said the driver had a criminal record, which should have raised alarm bells for anyone hiring him. After he spoke, a leaked version of a criminal records check on the suspect appeared to show he had no previous convictions. However, under Lebanese law, convictions can be deemed spent relatively quickly. Security sources said the driver had in fact been arrested for drugs offences, and local media reported that he was jailed for six months a decade ago for stealing a motorcycle.

Uber said drivers that use the app in Lebanon are fully licensed by the government and must have a clear judicial record. The suspect is understood to have passed this screening – but one legal expert told Lebanese media that crimes less severe than murder can be erased after three years.

Advertisement

EU court rules Uber should be regulated as a taxi company

The comments below have not been moderated.

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.