Facts

On April 28th 2015, Judge Roberto Luiz Corcioli Filho of the 12th Civil Court denied the injunction request for the blocking filed by Simtetaxi-SP (the trade union of São Paulo taxi drivers) against Uber. This is an app that requests rides through a GPS system, being a technology company that offers individual private transport. Against that, the syndicate claimed that Uber operates without regulation, offering an “illegal service” and that Uber promotes an illicit service that incurs on the “illegal exercise of the taxi driver profession”, since the app’s drivers do not have the permit to exercise this activity.

Procedural History

The claimants had their request granted by judge Roberto Luiz Corcioli Filho of the 12th Civil Court of São Paulo, that determined the block of the Uber application on April 28th 2015. It was determined that “the companies Google, Apple, Microsoft and Samsung stop providing in their respective virtual stores the Uber application, as well as […] remotely suspend the Uber applications from users who already have it installed in their mobile phones.”

However, the matter had already been judged by Judge Fernanda Gomes Camacho of the 19th Civil Court, making the previous sentence annulled and the process redistributed and assessed by Judge Fernanda. On May 4th 2015, she determined the revoking of the block, not granting the injunction claimed by Simtetaxi-SP. The companies Google, Apple, Microsoft and Samsung were, then, officiated about the revoking of the decision.

Legal Grounds

Judge Roberto Luiz Corcioli Filho of the 12th Civil Court granted the preliminary injunction request for the blocking claimed by Simtetaxi-SP. For him, vehicles registered on Uber did not follow the municipal rules of identification and inspection and are subjected to the public control. This understanding was based on the articles 5 and 170 of the Federal Constitution, which establishes that works, trades and professions should comply with the provisions of the law. Therefore, Uber’s activities would be contrary to the determinations of article 2 of the Law 12.468/2011 and the article 4, item VIII, of Law nº 12.587/2012, that considers “individual public transport: remunerated service of passenger transportation open to the public, through rental cars, for the realization of individualized rides”. Additionally, the Judge mentioned article 1 of the Law nº7.329/69, which says that the service of individual passenger transportation constitutes a service of public interest that can only be provided before a previous authorization of the City Hall and the Municipal Law of São Paulo nº15.676/12, that stipulates to be “prohibited the remunerated individual passenger transportation without a vehicle authorized for this purpose”. Lastly, he alleged that there would be a danger in the delay of the decision, justifying the preliminary injunction due to the taxi drivers that were being harmed by Uber’s illegal work.

The same issue had already been received in another Court. Judge Fernanda Gomes Camacho of the 19th Civil Court denied the request on the basis that the party did not have legitimacy and interest of acting to propose the action, being only fit for the Public Attorney’s Office the legitimacy of proposing the action with such object. Therefore, days after the decision of blockage, it was suspended.

• Uber | Blocking Order
• Uber | Order to Suspend Block