- Uber drivers are workers confirms the Court of Appeal in majority decision (Uber BV and others v Aslam and others)
- What are the practical implications of this judgment?
- What is the relevant background?
- Relevant law
- Factual background
- Decision of the employment tribunal
- Decision of the EAT
- What did the Court of Appeal decide?
- Case details
Employment analysis: The Central London Employment Tribunal was correct to find that the claimant Uber drivers were workers, rather than independent contractors, for various statutory purposes, despite Uber’s contractual documentation stating otherwise, according to a majority decision of the Court of Appeal. The factual findings supported the tribunal’s decision that the drivers had been working for Uber as part of its business, rather than there being an agency relationship, and this conclusion was also supported by the regulatory requirements operating in the Private Hire Vehicle (PHV) sector. Further, the tribunal had been entitled to find that the drivers were ‘working’ when they were in the relevant territory with the app switched on and were ready and willing to accept trips (ie they were to be treated as working while waiting for a trip request).
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial