• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Trend

Catch the trend on The World

  • Submit
  • Disclaimers
  • About
  • DMCA
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact

You are here: Home / Prosecutors lay out case against Tada in court

Prosecutors lay out case against Tada in court

December 3, 2019 by

The prosecution began its case against van-hailing app Tada on Monday during the first court hearing over whether the new mobility platform service is actually an illegal taxi service.

Prosecutors argued that Tada, operated by VCNC under car-sharing firm SoCar, is nothing but a call taxi service, although its operator argues it is an innovative mobility business.

“Tada users are, in nature, passengers, not renters, under the transportation law, given that they do not effectively engage in the operation of the vans,” the prosecution said during a hearing at the Seoul Central District Court.

The prosecution also cited the ministry’s earlier judgment that app-based ride-sharing service providers, like Uber, belong to an illegal taxi service.

“[Car-riding services, like Tada,] should be nurtured within the boundary of the current law, even if it is a new industry.”

Tada argues its business is within legal boundaries, citing the law’s exception clause, while taxi drivers argue Tada’s business practice is an arbitrary application of the rule, irrelevant to its original purpose of promoting tourism.

“[Tada] has been doing a rent-a-car business, just like existing rent-a-car operators, which provide customers with rented cars and arrange drivers. Tada is, in essence, nothing different from them, with only mobile platform technology newly combined,” a lawyer for Tada said.

“It’s unreasonable if [Tada] receives discriminative treatment, by any chance, because the number of its users is large,” the lawyer said.

The lawyer also cited the Transport Ministry’s deregulation policy for the promotion of the country’s car-sharing service, reminding that the exceptional clause on vehicles with 11 seats or more had been newly introduced to that effect.

Yonhap


  • CHR urges gov’t: File ‘nanlaban’ cases in court
  • Filing a case in court to demand payment of debt
  • ‘Bato’ dares critics of war on drugs to file cases in court
  • Napoles case: Makati court grants prosecutor’s request for extension
  • Fees paid by govt in Piatco case illegal – court
  • PCSO wins case at Court of Appeals
  • Hontiveros dares Aguirre to file case in court
  • MisOr court junks case fixer’s petition vs fiscals, police
  • De Lima admits blunder in handling Urbina case
  • Ex-DA chief hits govt move to beef up plunder case vs him

Filed Under: AsiaNews which case was the supreme court, remanded state court case, why does supreme court hear cases, 69 court case, cases crown court, cases european court of human rights, cases european court of justice, cases canterbury court, prosecutor duties in court, prosecutor doesn't show up for court, how are prosecutors assigned cases, about filing a case in court, cake case supreme court, sabarimala case supreme court judgement pdf, obado case at milimani court, maharashtra district court case status, reopening case magistrates court, frito lay 12 clipper court, anti abortion supreme court cases, waits v frito lay case brief, prosecutor dismisses case, yeovil magistrates court cases 2018, cases under tada, bani gala case supreme court, campaign finance cases supreme court, campaign finance court cases, campaign finance supreme court cases, best books on supreme court cases, medomsley detention centre court case

Primary Sidebar

RSS Recent Stories

  • The Kapil Sharma Show review: Comedian’s latest comeback is saved by Ranveer Singh and a bad singer
  • Han Seo-hee says girlfriend hurt her
  • With ‘The Witcher,’ Netflix gets fantastical
  • Jumbos’ Yoo proves he’s still got what it takes
  • eSIM service now available for Apple Watch
Copyright © 2019 Trend . Power by Wordpress.