Uber Technologies, Inc. and Uber Colombia, S.AS.​ v. Colombia

At a glance

Parties

Uber Technologies, Inc. (United States) and Uber Colombia, S.A.S. (Colombia) v. the Republic of Colombia

Forum and rules

Intended arbitration under Articles 10.15 and 10.16 of the United States–Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement; no arbitration had been filed at the date of the notice

Treaty

United States–Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, Chapter Ten

Sector

Ridesharing; technology platforms

Outcome

Only the Notice of Dispute (30 December 2019) is published. It asks for consultations and gives notice that Uber intends to arbitrate. The published documents do not show what happened next.

The dispute

Uber Technologies, Inc., a Delaware company, and its Colombian subsidiary Uber Colombia, S.A.S. run the Uber Platform in Colombia. The platform lets independent "Driver Partners" contract with riders, and Uber earns an intermediation fee. Uber has been in Colombia since 2013, and Uber Colombia has more than 230 employees there. In 2019 the Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio (SIC) ordered Uber, Uber Colombia and another Uber subsidiary to practically stop making the platform available. It also ordered Colombian telecommunications companies to suspend access to the platform. Uber says the order was issued in a time-barred action and published on the last day of the judicial calendar so that it could not be appealed at once. A few days earlier, the Superintendencia de Transporte had fined Uber Colombia without letting it review the complaints behind the fine. Uber alleges that these measures were arbitrary and discriminatory, since competing platforms were not treated the same way, and that they breached Chapter Ten of the Treaty, including through its most-favoured-nation clause.

Key holdings

1. No decision has been published. The Notice of Dispute claims that Uber's protected investments include the following: Uber Colombia as an enterprise; Uber's equity in it; intellectual property rights in the Uber Platform and the Uber trademark; and the network of contracts with riders and Driver Partners. Notice of Dispute, p. 2
2. Uber claims that the SIC order and the Superintendencia de Transporte fine were arbitrary and discriminatory measures that breached the Treaty. It also claims that blocking the platform was an act of censorship. Notice of Dispute, pp. 2–3
3. Uber asked for consultation and negotiation. It said it would submit the dispute to arbitration under Articles 10.15 and 10.16 if the dispute could not be settled, and reserved the right to deliver a notice of intent under Article 10.16.2. Notice of Dispute, p. 3

Procedural history

1. 2019The Superintendencia de Transporte fines Uber Colombia. A few days later, the SIC orders Uber to practically stop making the Uber Platform available in Colombia.
2. 30 December 2019Uber and Uber Colombia serve a Notice of Dispute under Chapter Ten of the United States–Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement and ask for consultations.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

For the claimant

Covington

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Uber
• ridesharing
• United States–Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement
• US–Colombia TPA
• notice of dispute
• Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio
• Superintendencia de Transporte
• platform blocking
• discrimination
• arbitrary measures
• most-favoured-nation clause
• intellectual property
• censorship
• consultation and negotiation
• technology platform

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.