Copyright standard
Nearly 13,500 black cab drivers should have their claim against Uber thrown out because it was brought too late, lawyers for the mobile ride-hailing app have told the High Court. The drivers claim to have lost money along with Justin Peters, who is taking legal action on behalf of rival taxi apps Kabbee and Iride, as a result of Uber London misrepresenting its business model to Transport for London (TfL) They allege that between 2012 and 2018, Uber London was using a licence in the capital that it had obtained unlawfully. Mr Peters and the drivers are seeking around £340 million in damages. Uber denies any wrongdoing and says the current legal action, filed at the High Court last year, came too late and should be thrown out. Mrs Justice O’Farrell ordered a five-day preliminary trial to be heard next summer, which will decide whether the black cab drivers knew about Uber’s alleged misrepresentation before a Magistrates’ Court hearing in June 2018. She said: “The Chief Magistrate found that there had been inappropriate matters concerning the operation of the licence by Uber.” It is understood that the drivers say they only learned of the “inappropriate matters” following publication of the Chief Magistrate’s judgment. Sonia Tolaney KC, for Uber, said in written submissions that the drivers would have known about it previously, when a letter from TfL to Uber was published in December 2017. In the letter, TfL said it considered Uber to have “deliberately made false representations”, the barrister said. She added: “A summary of TfL’s decision was made available to the public online and a full copy of the TfL decision letter was subsequently published by the London Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) on its website on December 20 2017. “At around the same time, the LTDA had approximately 10,183 members and it is therefore to be inferred that a very substantial number of the black cab claimants were members of the LTDA who received this document.” In setting the preliminary trial next year, Mrs Justice O’Farrell also ordered a sample of 20 drivers to disclose the date on which they began instructing solicitors on the issues. Robert Howe KC, for Mr Peters and the drivers, said in written submissions that further requests from Uber’s lawyers for the drivers to hand over any comments on the issues made in the media, on social media or other communications are “far too broad, vague, speculative and onerous”. He continued: “In relation to each sample claimant, it would require an extensive and costly investigation to collate and search potentially large quantities of social media materials, messages, WhatsApps, emails, other communication platforms etc, to no obvious purpose.” Mrs Justice O’Farrell agreed, describing a “trawl” through messages as “expensive and time-consuming”. The hearing in London is due to conclude on Wednesday.
