Lexology analyzes an important employment and regulatory decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union after the Spanish Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi, a driver’s union, challenged Uber’s operating model in Barcelona. The court, which is the highest in the E.U., sided with drivers.
Uber selects the non-professional drivers to use their own vehicles and, without the UBER branded application: (i) those drivers would not be led to provide transport services to the fares, and (ii) those customers would not use the services provided by those drivers. Accordingly, looking at the nature and effect of the services provided by Uber and the control exercised by Uber, the CJEU ruled that it was providing transport services – not information society services. As such, it ruled that Article 56 TFEU and the laws under the E-Commerce Directive, and related legislation, did not apply to these circumstances. Moreover, the CJEU noted that as these taxi services amounted to non-public urban transport services and such had not yet become the subject of an EU wide common transport policy, it remained open for individual Member States to regulate the conditions under which these services were provided.
Slowly, Uber is being forced to acknowledge the reality of local government. If you follow labor law, this is a must-read. Government is designed to be slower than the economy, and is catching up in mobility markets.
Update: Scotland is coming after Airbnb, too: The Times of London reports that Patrick Harvie, a Scottish housing advocate said: “There is a huge difference between what’s generally called the collaborative economy of people putting a spare room in their own home up for short-term let, and the conversion of entire properties to effectively mini-hotels which operate without paying any business taxes and which are distorting the housing market in this way.”