You can not just take and make your Uber

According to Roem.ru , the Belgorod region court recognized as legitimate the decision of the district court to ban the activities of Infoservice LLC on the territory of the Belgorod region, which acted as a taxi booking service “Maxim” and which provided taxi services through a mobile application. According to the website of the court , the plaintiff was the “Management of public roads and transport of the Belgorod region”.

The reason for the claim was the lack of permits for carrying out transportation activities, as well as the violation of the “rules for the carriage of passengers and baggage by road, city ground electric transport, and the carriage of passengers and baggage by passenger taxi”. According to the rules, this activity is carried out on the basis of a public chartering agreement (carriage) concluded by the charterer (client) directly with the driver of a passenger taxi or by accepting the charterer’s order for execution. The order is accepted by any means of communication .

The operation of the service "Maxim"

The organization placed in the media announcements of recruitment to the dispatch service and an invitation to cooperate for drivers with private cars. Drivers who wished to cooperate with the taxi service were installed special software on their mobile phones, through which the dispatcher service distributed applications among the machines. The dispatching service by phone took citizens' orders for taxi services, informed them about the cost of the order, then transmitted to the drivers information about requests through a mobile application. The driver, having selected the application, informed the operator about it through the same mobile application, after which he informed the client about the make and number of the car that would fulfill the application. Services of dispatchers in the amount of 10% of the value of each application were paid by transferring money to the settlement account through the terminal.

According to the plaintiff, the service did not have the right to provide taxi services; Neither the organization nor the drivers, whom the service attracted, had the necessary documents for passenger transportation, which, according to the plaintiff, carried a real threat to the safety of passengers.

Meanwhile, InfoService refused to admit the charges and stated in court that the company provides information services to users, but does not provide taxi services. But as it turned out in court, the rules of transportation imply that the order is accepted by any means of communication . Thus, the company, accepting applications for the transportation of passengers and distributing them among the drivers, in fact, organizes and arranges passenger transportation of passenger taxis.
')
However, neither the company nor the drivers who directly carry out passenger transportation, do not have permits for this activity. The company does not have information about the health status of drivers, the technical condition of used vehicles and does not guarantee the safety of transportation and order execution.

In this connection, the claim was fully satisfied.