
A lawsuit against Uber alleges that the company engaged in deceitful practices to drive its competitor Sidecar Technologies out of business in 2015, according to Reuters.
The lawsuit by SC Innovations, Sidecar’s successor, has been allowed to go forward by Judge Joseph Spero in San Francisco.
The lawsuit claims Sidecar, which was formed in 2012 and was the first company to offer ride-sharing practices, was crowded out of the business by Uber’s reportedly aggressive tactics.
The lawsuit alleges that Uber began offering low fares for passengers and better incentives for drivers to bust into the market. But then the company used “surge” and “dynamic” pricing, as well as other methods to cut driver pay and raise prices for riders, as a way to get back the money it had lost from its earlier deals once it was the most established company in its field.
The lawsuit also says Uber would secretly book and cancel rides on competitors’ apps. Using names like “Project Hell” and “SLOG,” the company allegedly hoped to frustrate competing drivers and passengers to switch to Uber.
Spero wrote that, at this stage, the allegations by SC Innovations seemed to merit the case going forward, unlike an earlier version of the suit that Spero blocked.
Uber has faced allegations before, such as in Colombia, where the country’s regulators accused the company of unfair advantages over local competition because Uber wasn’t paying the same regulatory fees. However, that was later reversed, and Uber was allowed back into the country by February.
Also, in London, Uber was stripped of its licensing to operate over concerns about false identities and safety on the app there.
Uber has also vowed to fight vigorously with an ad campaign this year against California’s AB 5, which forces some gig economy workers to be classified as employees rather than contractors.
Full Content: PYMNTS
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Meta Begins Defense After FTC Concludes Case in Landmark Antitrust Trial
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Data Bill Still No Closer to Passage As Parliamentary ‘Ping-Pong’ Drags On
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Awarded $271.2M in Damages Against Amgen
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Chair Proposes 15% Staff Reduction Amid Budget Constraints
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
UK Urges Antitrust Watchdog to Prioritize Growth and Clarity in Business Regulation
May 15, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Healthcare Antitrust
May 14, 2025 by
CPI
Healthcare & Antitrust: What to Expect in the New Trump Administration
May 14, 2025 by
Nana Wilberforce, John W O'Toole & Sarah Pugh
Patent Gaming and Disparagement: Commission Fines Teva For Improperly Protecting Its Blockbuster Medicine
May 14, 2025 by
Blaž Višnar, Boris Andrejaš, Apostolos Baltzopoulos, Rieke Kaup, Laura Nistor & Gianluca Vassallo
Strategic Alliances in the Pharma Sector: An EU Competition Law Perspective
May 14, 2025 by
Christian Ritz & Benedikt Weiss
Monopsony Power in the Hospital Labor Market
May 14, 2025 by
Kevin E. Pflum & Christian Salas