header-logo header-logo

29 May 2026
Issue: 8163 / Categories: Legal News , Transport , Arbitration , Employment , Liability
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Uber’s legal shield faces scrutiny on both sides of the Atlantic

251059
© Getty images
Uber has built a formidable strategy for insulating itself from liability for drivers’ conduct, but the legal terrain differs sharply between the US and England and Wales

Writing in NLJ this week, Lindsey Sasson, attorney at Hach & Rose LLP in New York, examines how arbitration clauses, class action waivers and ‘independent contractor’ classifications have helped Uber defeat negligence claims in the US.

American arbitrators have repeatedly ruled that drivers are not employees, relying heavily on contractual wording and Uber’s ability to force disputes into arbitration. Sasson says the company’s post-Epic Systems strategy transformed arbitration into ‘the primary instrument’ for managing litigation risk.

In England, however, Uber faces a more complicated framework because private hire licensing laws place obligations on operators as well as drivers. The UK Supreme Court’s ruling in Uber BV v Aslam also created a more ‘nuanced’ worker status test.

Despite these differences, Sasson argues Uber’s core approach remains the same: ‘push liability downstream to the driver’ wherever possible.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll