2 Ausgaben kostenlos für Sie
Fachmagazin taxi heute: Ihr Zugang zu exklusiven Inhalten rund um die Taxi- und Mietwagenbranche.
Aktueller Termin
Meist gelesen
USA: Second class-action against Uber confirms Uber's liability to drivers again.
In thousands of lawsuits, it is currently being examined whether Uber can be held liable for sexual assaults by drivers it mediates – despite Uber's position of merely operating a technical platform.
Another signal in this legal dispute is provided by the second pilot trial, announced for April 2026 and now completed. Also in this one, a jury found Uber liable for the misconduct of a driver. Uber does not accept the verdict and intends to challenge it.
Unlike in the first pilot trial in February 2026, when 8.5 million US dollars in damages were awarded (we reported in detail and explained the background), in the second case the plaintiff was awarded only 5,000 US dollars. The proceeding was based on the accusation that an Uber driver verbally sexually harassed the plaintiff and touched her inappropriately.
Thus the second bellwether trial also ended in a defeat for Uber. The damages awarded are significantly lower than in the first bellwether trial, but the decisive point is the renewed determination of Uber's liability for its drivers. Therefore the second ruling – provided it remains valid in the further proceedings – strengthens the plaintiffs' bargaining position.
Meanwhile, the class action grew to nearly 4,000 cases. The start of another bellwether trial is scheduled for October 2026. A verdict in this third case is expected in early November 2026.
Background
In the United States, a wave of lawsuits alleging sexual assaults during Uber rides is occupying the courts. Several thousand proceedings have been consolidated in a so-called Multidistrict Litigation (MDL). These are not a classic class action, but numerous individual lawsuits that are initially centrally handled because they share common legal questions.
The central question is the extent to which Uber can be held liable for the conduct of the drivers connected to its platform. Uber maintains that it operates only a technical intermediary platform. The drivers are independent contractors and not employees or direct representatives of the company. Uber cannot therefore be held liable for crimes committed by individual drivers in the course of their ride services.
The plaintiffs' side sees it differently. It argues that Uber controls key parts of the mediation, pricing, communication, and the conduct toward passengers. As a result, from the customers' point of view, it creates the impression that the ride is offered by Uber and that the driver acts on behalf of the company. In addition, the female plaintiffs allege that, despite known risks, Uber has not done enough to protect passengers, which Uber denies with numerous counterarguments.
In so-called bellwether trials, i.e., selected sample proceedings, courts and juries are now testing how they evaluate these questions in typical individual cases. The rulings apply only to the specific case being adjudicated. However, they can provide important indications of how high the litigation risk is for both sides, and thus influence potential settlement negotiations and the outcome of the numerous remaining lawsuits. (Source: TorHoerman Law, torhoermanlaw.com/uber-sexual-assault-lawsuit, as of August 2026)
Content automatically translated.
Taxi-Fahrzeuge (Pkw) , Taxi-Newsletter, Taxameter, Taxi-Fahrer , BZP – Deutscher Taxi- und Mietwagenverband , Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO) , Krankenbeförderung , Weiterbildung , Taxi-Konzessionen , Verkehrspolitik , Mietwagenbranche , Taxi-Apps , Berufskraftfahrer-Qualifikations-Gesetz BKrFQG) , Taxizentralen , Personal, Gehälter, Arbeitsschutz , Wirtschaftsnachrichten , Werbung , Taxi-Folierung , Taxi-Umrüster , Straßenverkehr , Elektromobilität, Taxifuhrpark und -flottenmanagement , Taxi-Versicherungen , Hybrid, Diesel, Erdgas , Taxi-Magazin
