A federal judge on Friday granted a request by Uber Technologies Inc and its chief executive officer to put a passenger’s price-fixing lawsuit against them on hold, while they appeal his refusal to let them arbitrate the dispute.
Calling his decision a “close call,” US District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan said the defendants had not made a “strong showing” that their appeal would likely succeed, though they would face irreparable harm if arbitration were wrongfully denied.
But he said the appeals court could clarify whether Spencer Meyer, the Connecticut plaintiff, and others like him consent to arbitration when they buy services subject to conditions in “clickwrap” and “browsewrap” agreements found online.
In his proposed nationwide class-action lawsuit, Meyer said Uber and CEO Travis Kalanick violated antitrust laws by conspiring with drivers to charge high “surge-pricing” fares during periods of heavy demand. Uber takes a share of drivers’ earnings.
On July 29, Rakoff denied Uber’s request for arbitration, saying Meyer never agreed to it and the San Francisco-based company did not properly notify him about its policies.
Meyer opposed delaying his case while Uber appealed that ruling.
“We look forward to defending Judge Rakoff’s decision and having this matter returned to the district court,” Brian Feldman, a lawyer for Meyer, said in an email.
Full Content: Reuters
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Judge Dismisses Antitrust Lawsuit Against Ivy League Over Athletic Scholarships
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
FTC and DOJ Revamp Merger Guidelines to Identify Illegal Transactions More Efficiently
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
US Consumer Watchdog Eyes Expansion of ‘Junk Fee’ Crackdown Ahead of 2024 Election
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Brazil Proposes Reform to Competition Law Targeting Big Tech
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Meta Enhances User Data Control, Resolving German Antitrust Dispute
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh