
Uber Technologies has taken legal action against DoorDash, alleging that the food delivery rival engages in anticompetitive practices that result in increased costs for both restaurants and consumers. The lawsuit, filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco, claims that DoorDash pressures restaurants into maintaining exclusivity with its platform, effectively limiting competition in the delivery market.
According to Yahoo News, Uber asserts that DoorDash employs coercive tactics to dissuade restaurants from using Uber Eats’ first-party delivery service, Uber Direct. The complaint highlights claims that DoorDash has threatened to impose higher commission fees on restaurants that also collaborate with Uber Eats. In some instances, the lawsuit alleges, DoorDash warned a restaurant that it would face an additional 30 percent per order in commission costs if it partnered with Uber.
Additionally, per Yahoo News, Uber claims that DoorDash has leveraged its influence by threatening restaurants with millions of dollars in extra fees should they engage with competing services. The legal filing also cites an incident in which a large restaurant group ultimately abandoned plans to launch on Uber Eats in 2024 due to pressure from DoorDash. Furthermore, Uber contends that DoorDash has penalized restaurants appearing on multiple platforms by lowering their visibility within its app.
Related: Massachusetts Top Court Clears Way for Voter Decision on Gig Driver Classification
“DoorDash’s underhanded tactics have cost Uber millions of dollars in revenue and unlawfully restricted its ability to grow Uber Direct,” the lawsuit states, as originally reported by The Wall Street Journal.
In response, DoorDash has firmly denied the allegations. “Uber’s case has no merit. Their claims are unfounded and based on their inability to offer merchants, consumers, or couriers a quality alternative,” a DoorDash spokesperson said in a statement provided to Reuters.
Uber is now seeking legal intervention to compel DoorDash to alter its business practices. As the case progresses, the dispute underscores the fierce competition within the food delivery industry, where companies vie for restaurant partnerships and market dominance.
Source: Yahoo News
Featured News
Belgian Authorities Detain Multiple Individuals Over Alleged Huawei Bribery in EU Parliament
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Grubhub’s Antitrust Case to Proceed in Federal Court, Second Circuit Rules
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Pharma Giants Mallinckrodt and Endo to Merge in Multi-Billion-Dollar Deal
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Targets Meta’s Market Power, Calls Zuckerberg to Testify
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
French Watchdog Approves Carrefour’s Expansion, Orders Store Sell-Off
Mar 13, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li