An interim measure that bans the alternative taxi service provider Uber to drive in Brno is valid again. The Constitutional Court upheld the Lido Taxi Radio taxi complaint. In practice, much will not change, Uber awaits the results of controversy and does not operate the service in the South Moravian metropolis.
The Constitutional Court compared Uber with an English proverb: “What looks like a duck is probably a duck.” They made it clear that Uber not only mediates the agreement with the application, but also ensures the transport of people itself.
The Constitutional Court sent the case back to the High Court in Olomouc, which canceled the interim measure last September. The Supreme Court must decide again on the appeal against the measure.
The judges have criticized the Supreme Court for the expression of libel and lack of argument. “The Supreme Court has failed to assess the relationship between the premise and the conditions of transport activity in Brno. We all know a variety of apps, which compare, for example, the prices of accommodation, but nobody will say that they also sell this cheap accommodation. Uber provides transportation services under conditions that the Court of Justice of the European Union has qualified not only as an application mediation, but also as a transport service,” said Judge Jan Filip.
Uber doesn´t drive in Brno, although it could
At the same time, however, it has stressed that it did not predict the overall outcome of the disputes or how this service should be regulated.
The decision of the Constitutional Court will probably not have a direct impact, because Uber is not going to Brno anymore, even though it theoretically could. Lido Taxi Radio Attorney Marek Hejduk, however, welcomed the opinion of constitutional judges before further court trials. “In another way, we would get to Constitutional Court in a few years, which might be too late and the whole market would be destroyed,” Hejduk said.
According to Uber´s Jiri Kindla, the CC has dealt with the High Court’s decision only on procedural aspects and has found deficiencies in the justification. The comment on the nature of the Kindl dispute does not appear in today’s finding. He expects the Supreme Court, based on the Uber argument, to cancel the interim measure once again.
The company itself said that it respects the decision of the
Constitutional Court, although it does not reflect the way it is currently operating.”
Meanwhile, we have changed the model we are doing around the world, including the Czech Republic, where we are working hard to become a city partner and a taxi driver. Currently, only drivers with taxi license are accepted in Prague,” the company said in a statement.
The courts have not yet decided on the core of the dispute, whether the Uber services are legal or not. Taxi drivers consider Uber to be unfair competition because their drivers may not have the same conditions as they do.
If Uber does not meet the conditions, it is most likely unfair competition. Under the superseded ruling of the High Court, Uber’s activity can be classified as another service in the field of transport, but not as taxis. It does not, according to the Supreme Court, comply with the legal conditions.
