Uber’s attempt to overturn ride-hailing caps by New York City did not last long. The Supreme Court of New York has refused the firm’s request to cancel the limit law imposed in August last year. The court declined Uber’s claim that NYC had exceeded its bounds. There have been far less particular entrustments of power that have passed muster earlier, as per the Supreme Court. It also rebuffed the assertion by Uber that other laws preempted the limits.
Uber claimed to the media it was “let down” with the result, stating that it “penalizes” drivers who are coerced to rent vehicles. Earlier, it has disputed that the limits might hurt outer regions (with less access to public transport) and would not solve NYC’s issues with congestion of traffic.
It is not surprising that the Supreme Court might toss the effort to knife the law when hurdles such as this typically do not work. It does make sure that the expanded limit will carry on as planned, although. It also does not bode fine for Lyft’s case in opposition to NYC with same objections. Love it or not, both ridesharing firms might have to reside with the caps for the coming future.
On a related note, Uber is not about to sit silently while NYC expands its limits on ridesharing. The firm earlier claimed that it has taken legal action against NYC in an effort to end rules that both cap the amount of time drivers can invest cruising Manhattan seeking for rides and freeze the number of new for-hire permits. It contended that the cruising law, which will limit the roaming amount to 31% of drive time by July next year, might “intimidate the viability” of the service. The rates were decided employing “arbitrary and flawed” models, Uber claimed.