- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
In a landmark ruling, UK's Supreme Court rules that Uber drivers entitled to worker rights
In a landmark ruling, UK's Supreme Court rules that Uber drivers entitled to worker rights The seven Judges of the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court have unanimously ruled that Uber drivers are classed as "workers" and entitled to rights like minimum wage, holiday pay and rest breaks and not self-employed. The ruling has come as a blow to the gig economy and will have ramifications...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
In a landmark ruling, UK's Supreme Court rules that Uber drivers entitled to worker rights
The seven Judges of the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court have unanimously ruled that Uber drivers are classed as "workers" and entitled to rights like minimum wage, holiday pay and rest breaks and not self-employed.
The ruling has come as a blow to the gig economy and will have ramifications for millions of others. It will have a significant impact on the U.K.'s burgeoning economy and make it difficult for companies engaging people via digital platforms to assert that they are self-employed.
The dispute will be returned to a specialty tribunal, which will decide on the award to be given to the 25 drivers who filed the case in 2016. About 1,000 similar claims against the company, which had been stayed until after the ruling, may also proceed.
Till the Court ruling, Uber drivers were treated as self-employed. long-running legal tussle.
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Uber's appeal and observed, "The legislation is intended to give certain protections to vulnerable individuals who have little or no say over their pay and working conditions."
London is one of Uber's largest and most lucrative markets in Europe, with 45,000 drivers and 3.5 million people who use the app once every 90 days.